MASTER 
NEGATIVE 


NO 


92-80666-14 


MICROFILMED  1992 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


as  part  of  the  .      r.    •    .» 

"Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project 


Funded  by  the  xttttco 

NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 

The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or  other 
reproductions  of  copyrighted  material... 

Columbia  University  Library  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to 
accept  a  copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


AUTHOR: 


DEVIVIER,  WALTER 


TITLE: 


INQUISITION,  AN  ESSAY 


PLACE: 


SAN  FRANCISCO 


DA  TE : 


1904 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 


Master  Negative  # 


Restrictions  on  Use: 


BIBLIOGRAPHIC  MICROFORM  TARGET 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  -  Existing  Bibliographic  Record 


wmmi^i^mftr'fim 


946.04 
D49 


<»9  ii^Hwy    ■  ■■ii,pip«p! 


Devivier,  W  alter,  1833- 

Tlie  inquisition,  an  essay  extracted  from  Devivier 's 
Christian  apologetics.  Ed.  by  Rev.  Joseph  C.  Sasia,  s.  j. 
San  Francisco,  Calif.,  Catholic  truth  society,  1904. 


47,  il,  p.    21i 


cm 


ijasia,  Joseph  C,  1843-      ed.  1.  Inquisition. 


I       '^ 


20-644 


Library  of  Congress 


BX171S.D4 


I) 


■I 


■I 


il 


-> 


TECHNICAL  MICROFORM  DATA 


REDUCTION     RATIP:_____JJX. 


FILM     SIZE:__3^_/)7^__ 

IMAGE  PLACEMENT:    lA  @     IB     IIB  ^ 

DATE     FILMED: S:zLail.^ INITIALS G  ■_&_■_ 

HLMEDBY:    RESEARCH  PUBLICATIONS.  INC  WOODBRIDGE,  CT 


E 


Association  for  Information  and  image  iManagement 

1100  Wayne  Avenue,  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

12         3        4 

iiiiliinliinliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiilii 


mimmm 


Inches 


5 

iliiii 


mii 


7        8 


9       10 

lIllllllUlI 


11 


iiiiiiiiimiiiiiiiiiiiiiiui 


12       13       14       15    mm 

liiiiliinliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiii 


1111 


I  I  I  I  I 


1 


T 


1.0 

■^  i  2.8 

1.3 

II, 

1.4 

2.5 
2.2 

2.0 
1.8 

1.6 

I.I 

1.25 

TTT 


1 


MRNUFRCTURED   TO  RUM  STfiNDRRDS 
BY   RPPLIED   IMfiGE,    INC. 


f 


* 


i\ 

1^ 

.    4    .    , 

ir4' 


Columbia  (llnitif rsftp 

int^fCitpofilrujgflrk 

THn  LIBRARIES 


I 


1     - 


liiHii' 


] 


m 


i 


THE   INQUISITION 


AN   ESSAY 


Extracted  from  Devivier's  Christian  Apologetics 


Edited  by  REV.  JOSEPH  C.  SASIA,  S.  J. 


"> 


i 
i 


'     SAN   FRANld^CO.  CAL.  * 
CATHOUC  TRUTH   SOCIETY 


.        I      ■»       !        •  1 


■.  9  0.4 


H 


Introductory  Remarks 


M///7  obsfai. 

P.    W.  RIO R DAN, 
<^rchbishop  of  San  Francisco,  Cal. 


November  2y,  1904. 


•  «  •  . 

•  •  •  •  •   • 

•  •  •  •  I  ■ 


* 


•  •  I  • '  I 


•  1   •  •  •  • 


One  of  the  chief  functions  of  the  Cathoh:  press  in  our 
days  is  to  meet  and  refute  misrepresentations  of  things 
CathoHc.     As  experience  teaches,  nearly  all  the  prejudices 
against  Rome,  its  religion  and  institutions  arise  from  mis- 
understanding  them;    sometimes   through    ignorance,    and 
sometimes  through  motives  as  dishonorable  as  they  are 
oroundless.     If  Catholicity,  its  history,  its  teachings  and  its 
methods  were  what  they  are  frequently  asserted  to  be  by 
the  enemies  of  the  Church,  our  separated  Christian  breth- 
ren \\'ould  be  entirely  justilled  in  their  hostility.     It  would 
then  be  not  only  their  right,  but  also  their  duty  to  do  every- 
thing in  their  power  to  counteract  the  baneful  inlluence  of 
sucli'  an  institution.     But,  as  it  has  been  shown  hundreds 
of  times,  it  is  not  the  religion,  the  doctrines,  discipline  and 
institutions  of  the  Catholic   Church,  that  our  adversaries 
persist  in  denounring  and  reprobating,  but  their  own  mis- 
conception of  them  founded  upon  ignorance,  bigotry  and 
deep-seated  prejudice.    Pratestant  preach_ers  are  usually  the 
greatest  sinners  in  this  respect,  and  who,  last  of  all,  should 
dare  palliate  their  wrong  under  the  extenuating  plea  of  ignor- 
ance.   That  some  people  should  deem  it  litting  for  Catholics 
to  sit  silent  under  unwarranted  attacks  upon  their  religion 
rather  than  put  u.p  a  proper  defense,  is  something  beyond 
our  comprehension.     We  much  prefer  the  line  of  conduct 
pointed  out  by  tlie  late  Pontiff,  Leo  XIII,  who  earnestly 
exhorts  both  the  clergy  and  the  cultured  members  of  the 
laify  to  employ,  in  the  defense  of  Catholic  truth,  the  very 
weapon  that  our  enemies  are  using  in  the  spread  of  error 
with  a  zeal  worthy  of  a  better  cause,  viz.,  the  po^^'er  of  the 
press,  whose  pages  may  be  made  to  reach  millions  of  readers 
desirous  to  know  the  truth.     It  is  precisely  for  this  reason 
that  we  have  de:ided  to  republish,  with  several  additions, 
our  article  on  the  Inquisition,  which  is  found  in  \  ol.  II,  page 


c  > 


434359 


i^ 


■V 


4  1 11 1  r  o  d  Li  ci  o  r  y    K  e  m  arks 

584    of  our  edifuni  <if  Devivier's  "Christian  Apologetics," 
printed  in  San  Jose,  Cal..  July,    m^.     The  immediate 
reason  or  occasion  thai  determined  us  to  reproduce  tha 
.necial  article,  the  Inquisition,  is  briefly  this.    We  received 
from  ihc  editors  of  the  ■•OutlcK.k,"  a  weekly  New  \ork 
maiiadne,  a  circular  soliciting  our  subscription  to  their  recent 
publication,  in  twentv-five    volumes,  ot    the  -'Historians 
Hi.iorv  of  the  World,"  and  some  friends  kindly  lent  us,  tor 
examination,  a  specimen  volume,  whi:h  the  same  editors 
had  sent  to  them  along  uith  a  similar  circular.     Interested 
as  we  are  in  historical  studies,  we  hastened  t..  peruse  me 
contents  of  the  specimen  volume  (\'o1.  X),  and  cherished 
the  hope  that  this  new  work  might  be  a  valuable  acquisition 
to  our  librarv.     Bui  we  were  sadly  disapp^miled.     Insleau 
of  finding;  in  that  compilation  a  fair,  impartial,  truthtu 
exposition  of  historical  facts,  we  met  with  statements  and 
appreciations  as  malignant  and  perverse  as  they  are  un- 
founded and  Lintrue.    This  charge  is  fully  justihed  by  what 
we  read  in  a  long  appendix  to  the  tenth  volume  on  the 

moLiisilion  (pages  562-5%).    To  say  "'^»f"Vi  'f,    ?.'; 
tionable  engraving,  an  historical  falsehood  ot  the  blackest 
tvpe    the  quotation  from  Limborch,  heading  thai  chanter 
bristles  with  the  most  atrocious  calumnies,  and   is  a  tit 
preliminary  to  the  mendacious  treatment  that  follows.    One 
quotation.'out  of  many  that  might  be  adduced,  w'ill  sutuce. 
On  pasie  572  Ihev  write  as  follows:  "Better,  said  the  Inquisi- 
torial JiKkes,  that  a  hundred  innocent  persons  should  be 
cut  oft  and  go  to  paradise,  than  lei  one  heretic  escape."   An 
entirelv  opposite  principle  governed  the  proceedings  ot  the 
Uiquisition,  and  it  was  enunciated  by  the  Roman  Pontiffs  in 
ihe  followinsi  terms  diametrically  contrary  to  the  maxim 
expressed  above.    "11  is  better  that  crime  should  occasion- 
ally go  unpunished  than  that  even  one  innocent  man  should 
be" chastized  as  guilty."    In  the  words  of  the  Roman  poet, 
"Ex  uno  disce  omnes."    From  this  specimen  ot  wiltull  mis- 
representation the  reader  may  easily  judge  of  the  character 
of  the  whole  work. 


inlroduclory    Remarks  5 

That  the  editors  are  in  a  great  measure  influenced  by  anti- 
Catholic  prejudice  may  be  easily  inferred  from  the  whole 
tenor  of  that  chapter  on  the  Inquisition,  which  is  in  fact  as 
virulent  a  libel  upon  the  Church  of  Rome  as  we  have  ever 
chanced  to  read.  It  is  put  as  an  appendix  that  should  bear 
the  title,  "In  caiida  venenum"   (there  is  poison  in  the  tail 

end).  . 

We  mis;hl  mulliplv  quotations  and  criticisms  on  this  sub- 
ject indelinitely,  but 'the  sample  given  nifl  amply  sutiice  to 
prove  our  conlention,  namely,  that  the  treatment  ot  the 
subject  of  the  Inquisition  in  Vol.  X  of  the  "Historians'  His- 
tory." compiled  and  published  under  the  auspices  of  the 
editors  of  the  "Oullook,"furnishes  an  additional  fresh  prot)f 
of  the  saying  of  the  distinguished  statesman  and  writer. 
Count  Joseph  De  Maistre,  that  "English  history  during  the 
la<t  three  hundred  years  has  been  a  persistent  conspiracy 
against  Catholic  truth."  Readers  anxious  to  learn  the  truth 
on  this  much  debated  and  often  misrepresented  subject  of 
the  Inquisition,  and  willing  to  hear  the  other  side  ot  the 
ouestion-audire  alteram  partem— will  tind  it  clearly  and 
honestly  stated  in  the  following  pages  published  by  the 
courtesy  of  the  Catholic  Truth  Society  of  this  city. 

In  keeping  with  the  critical  spirit  of  our  age  we  made  it  a 
point  to  cite  carefiflly  and  exactly  all  our  authorities,  so  as 
to  facilitate  the  researches  of  the  scholar  who  might  feel 
inclined  to  verify  our  quotations. 

REV.  JOSEPH    C.  SASIA,  S.  J. 

St.  Ignatius  College,  San  Francisco,  Cal., 
November,  l9o4. 


I 


ir-a 


THE  INQUISITION 


1.  The  enemies  of  the  Catholi:  Church  are  hi  the  habit  of 
casting  up  against  her  the  word  hiquisition  as  if  it  were  a 
condemnation  whiioiit  appeal. 

All  fair-mindea  men  will  agree  that  this  subject  must  be 
approached  u-i!h  llie  eve  of  calm  reason,  and  not  of  passion- 
ate prejudice;  and  lliat  history,  not  party  spirit,  must  sit  in 
judgment  upon  it.  It  is  painful  for  all  lovers  ot  honor  and 
truth  to  witness  the  Hoods  of  calumnies,  misrepresentations, 
exaggerations  and  falsehoods  pervading  in  great  measure  the 
literature  of  the  Inquisition;  but  it  is  still  more  painful  to  see 
held  accountable  for  all  real  and  imaginary  evils  of  that 
tribunal,  the  very  personages  who  constantly  fought  against 
its  abuses,  the  Popes  of  Rome. 

It  is  well  to  remark  at  the  outset  that,  except  m  the  case 
of  a  few  people,  of  slight  education  at  the  best,  who  permit 
themselves  to  be  taken  unawares  and  led  away,  tne  natred 
of  the  Inquisition  is  confounded  with  hatred  of  the  Church. 
We  know  from  their  literary  works,  novels,  plays,  jour- 
nals   etc.,  the  tactics  of  the  enemies  of  that  institution. 
Their  airn  is  to  strike  at  the  imagination,  and  e.xcite  the 
feelings  bv  a  moving  picture  or  by  a  skilful  and  dramatic 
arrangement  of  incidents.    These  writers  are  carettil  not  to 
inform  their  readers  that  the  use  of  the  torture  and  other 
severe  penalties,  resorted  to  at  the  time  of  the  Inquisition, 
entirely  opposed  as  those  means  are  to  modern  customs,  was 
in  full  conformity  with  the  penal  code  of  past  centuries,  and 
habitually  used  by  all  the  tribunals  of  those  times  m  all 
countries'    In  the  eves  of  these  writers,  the  moment  blood  is 
shed  or  fire  lit,  the'  cause  is  judged  and  the  tribunal  is  held 
to  be  in  the  wrong.    They  do  not  reason,  they  declaim ;  they 
do  not  try  to  convince  their  readers,  but  only  seek  to  arouse 
theiV  indignation.    It  is  plain  that  honest  men  do  not  act  m 
this  way. 


/i 


1 


\ 


8 


T  he    1  n  q  Li  i s i  t  i  o n 


It  is  not  thus  that  history  should  be  written,  ll  should 
have  no  other  aim  tlian  that  of  telling  the  truth.  'Mts  first 
law,"  savs  Leo  XIII  in  tiie  ''Brief  on  Historical  Studies" 
(August  18,  1893),  "is  to  assert  nothing  false  and  to  have 
no  fear  of  telling  the  truth."  The  Church  also  only  requiies 
the  truth,  and  we,  her  defenders,  do  not  intend  to  use  any 
other  weapon  than  that  in  her  service.  Let  us,  therefore, 
reason  this  matter  out,  and  tell  the  whole  truth  conccrnnig 
the  Inquisition,  as  much  at  least  as  it  is  possible  to  do  within 
the  narrow  limits  to  whi:h  we  are  obliged  to  con  line  our- 
selves. 

I.— ORKilN  AND  NATURE  OF  THE  ECCLESIASTICAL 

INQUISITION. 

2.  Above  all,  it  is  necessary  to  distinguish  carefully  the 
Ecclesiastical  Inquisition  from  the  Spanish  Inquisition. 

(1)  Inquisition  in  general  means  the  searching  for  hercHics, 
with  the  view  of  repressing  their  proselytism  or  of  convert- 
ing them.  In  this  sense  the  Inquisition  dates  from  the  very 
lieginning  of  the  Church;  it  was  always  the  strict  duty  of 
the  Popes  and  Bishops  to  tight  heresy,  to  prevent  its  spread, 
either  by  means  of  gentleness  and  persuasion,  or,  when  these 
failed,  by  punishment. 

(2)  However,  by  Inquisition  is  generally  understood,  a 
court  of  justice,  called  the  Holy  Office,  ecclesiastical  and  also 
civil,  established  to  enquire  into  the  crime  of  heresy  and  to 
punish  the  guilty.  This  spe:ial  tribunal  only  dates  from 
the  bei^inning  of  the  thirteenth  century,  when  Pope  Inno:ent 
ill  founded  it  to  repress  the  heresy  of  the  Albigenses  and 
the  Waldenses.  Reviving  the  heresy  of  the  Manicheans, 
these  sectaries  spread,  with  their  errors,  the  spirit  of  revolt, 
and,  with  weapons  in  their  hands,  ihey  threatened  to  destroy 
both  the  Church  and  the  State.  Every  eti'ort  was  made  to 
bring  them  back  to  their  duty  by  instruction  and  persuasion, 
but  In  vain.     Then  the  two  powers  thus  menaced  united 


Thelnquisition  9 

their  forces  against  the  common  enemy ;  to  the  ecclesiastical 
power  fell  the  duty  of  ascertaining  the  crime,  to  the  other 
that  of  intlicting  the  penalty. 

The  principal  aim  of  the  Inquisition  was  the  preservation  / 
of  the  faith  by  the  detection  and  condemnation  of  heresy. 
But  here  we  must  bear  in  mind  one  important  distinction 
as  to  the  manner  in  which  that  tribunal  was  to  deal  with  it. 
If  there  was  question  of  heresy,  that  contained  no  principle 
at  variance  with  morals,  and  was  moreover  professed  with- 
out tumult  or  violence  to  the  established  rights  of  civil 
society,  in  other  words,  if  the  heretical  doctrine  was  secret 
and  interior,  the  records  of  the  world  can  be  chal- 
lenged to  produce  a  single  instance  of  intolerance  on  the 
part  of  the  Catholic  Church.  In  such  a  case  the 
Church,  which  does  not  judge  of  interior  things— 
Ecclesia  non  judicat  de  internis— left  men  to  their  own 
responsibility  before  God,  their  omniscient  Supreme  Judge. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  whenever  there  was  question  of 
heresy,  that  did  contain  or,  at  least,  implied  principles 
at  variance  with  good  morals,  and  the  established  order 
of  civil  society,  then,  we  freely  admit,  the  Catholic  Church 
was  intolerant,  for  she,  the  guardian  of  faith,  morality  and 
public  peace,  could  not  betray  the  trust  confided  by  her 
divine  Founder  to  her  keeping  for  the  welfare  of  mankind. 
(See  "Christian  Apologetics,"  Vol.  II,  pages  557-576.) 

The  very  nature  of  things  called  for  the  intervention  of 
ecclesiastical  judges,  for  they  alone  w^re  competent  to  judge 
of  matters  of  faith,  and  to  discriminate  between  Catholic 
and  heretical  doctrines.  Those  who  find  fault  with  this 
plan  as  carried  out  in  Catholic  Spain  are  compelled  by  the 
logic  of  facts  to  admit  one  or  other  of  the  following  erron- 
eous propositions: 

(1)  That  the  State,  whose  citizens  in  an  overwhelming 
majority,  profess  the  same  (Catholic)  faith,  should  profess 
no  religion  whatever,  and  be  consequently  atheistic. 

(2)  That  such  State  may  not  conscientiously  profess  the 
Catholic  religion. 


10 


The    Inquisition 


1'  he    Inquisition. 


11 


/ 


(3)  That  it  it  were  to  adopt  Catliolicism  as  the  State 
rehgion,  it  could  not  conscientiously  protect  it. 

(4)  That,  when  it  should  happen  to  defend  the  adopted 
faith  against  its  assailants,  the  settlement  of  religious  mat- 
ters in  dispute  could  be  entrusted  to  incompetent  judges. 

It  is  plain  that  this  last  pro:eeding  would  be  in  direct 
opposition  to  the  judicial  practice  of  all  civilized  nations, 
whose  courts  of  justice  are  wont  to  base  their  judgment,  in 
some  special  cases,  on  the  testimony  of  professional  experts 
in  matters  of  science  and  art.  As  the  old  saying  has  it, 
Credendum  est  in  arte  peritis.  (See  Taparelli,_"Saggio  I  eo- 
retico,"  \ol.  1,  page  623;  Roman  edition,  1855.) 

3.  '  This  Ecclesiastical  Inquisition  always  had  for  its  pur- 
^pose  to  preserve  the  Catholic  people  from  the  poison  of 
heresy  aad  the  State  from  the  revolts,  which  were  its  usual 
consequence.  The  duty  of  the  Inquisitor  was  generally  con- 
tided  to  legates  or  delegates,  among  whoui  were  distin- 
guished in  the  first  rank  the  Sons  of  St.  Dominic,  but  only 
from  the  year  1223,  that  is  to  say,  twelve  years  after  the 
death  of  their  founder,  which  does  not  prevent  the  enemies 
of  the  Church  from  transforming  this  Saint  into  a  Grand 

Inquisitor.     '  . 

bi^lituted  bv  the  mother  of  all  the  Churclies,  successively 
introduced  into  nearly  all  parts  of  the  Christian  world,  the 
Ecclesiastical  Inquisition  was  undoubtedly  the  work  of  the 
Roman  Pontiffs,  who  never  regretted  having  established  it. 

4  Quite  dirterent  was  the  Spanish  Inquisition,  founded 
by  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  in  1481,  to  preserve,  with  the 
Christian  faith,  tlie  Spanish  nation  from  the  conspiracies  of 
the  Jews  and  Moors,  who  feigned  to  be  Christians  in  order 
to  carry  out  their  wicked  designs  against  the  Church,  as  well 
as  asjainst  the  State.  In  this  tribunal  there  existed  two 
distin-t  jurisdictions,  one  of  which  depended  upon  the 
Church  the  other  upon  the  State.  But  in  Spain  the  civil 
power  had  so  great  a  preponderance  that  many  historians, 
thou"h  far  from  favorable  to  Catholicism,  consider  the 


Spanish   Inquisition  as  more  a  politi:al   than   a  reHgious 
institution. 

5.  We  admit  that  Sixtus  IV  did  approve  the  first  project 
of  the  Spanish  Inquisition,  and  that  he  sanctioned  its  funda- 
mental statute.  It  was  from  the  Holy  See  that  the  Ecclesi- 
astical Inquisitors  received  their  jurisdiction  and  all  their 
spiritual  powers.  The  King,  however,  had  obtained  from 
the  Pope  the  power  to  nominate  them  for  the  oftice. 

In  this  connection  it  is  well  to  remember  who  were  the 
chief  and  first  movers  for  its  establishment.  The  people 
and  the  Cortes  or  Parliament,  demanded  it  from  the  King 
as  the  only  remedy  to  the  desperate  political  evils  of  their 
unhappy  country  teeming  with  conspirators  against  the 
throne,  as  well  as  against  the  altar.  And  it  was  precisely  in 
compliance  with  such  urgent  petitions  that  Ferdinand  and 
Isabella  earnestly  solicited  it  from  the  Roman  Pontifl.  As 
a  matter  of  fact  the  Inquisition  has  never  been  established  in 
any  country  without  the  actual  connivance  and  consent  of 
its  temporal  rulers. 

6.  On.TECT  or  the  Discussion.  All  discussion  concern- 
ing tbe  Inquisition  may  be  reduced  to  the  two  following 
questions,  which  are  altogether  distinct  from  etich  other: 

7.  FiKST  Question.  Was  the  institution  of  this  tribunal 
legitimate  in  principle;  in  other  words,  was  it  in  accordance 
with  right  and  justice? 

8.  Second  O^'i^^tion.  Were  the  proceedings  of  the 
Inquisition,  as  we  know  tiiem  through  reliable  history,  de- 
serving of  the  condemnation  with  which  they  are  stigma- 
tized, and  can  they  be  made  a  subject  of  reproach  against 
the  Ciiurch?  We  must  not  forget  that  in  all  this  discussion 
there  is  no  question  of  infidels,  pagans  and  Jews,  over  whom 
the  Church  has  no  jurisdiction,  and  whom  the  Church  never 
pretended  to  constrain,  but  that  the  Inquisition  refers  solely 
to  Christians,  that  is  to  say,  to  people  whom  regeneration 
by  baptism  had  stibjected  to  her  laws.    ''The  former,"  says 


12 


The    Inquisition 


The    Inquisition 


13 


/st.  Tliomas,  "must  not  be  compelled  \o  obedience  to  Ihe 
Church;  the  others,  on  the  contrary,  sliould  be  coerced: 
'Contra  vero,  alteri  sunt  cogendi.'  " 

Il.-LAWFULNESS  OF  THE  INQUISITION   IN 

PRINCIPLE 

9  A  On  the  Fmit  of  the  Church.  For  a  Caiholic 
there  can  be  no  doubt  on  the  subject.  Popes  and  Councils, 
Saints  and  doctors,  the  Scripture  and  tradition,  proclaim 
that  the  Church,  as  a  perfect  society,  has  the  right,  and  i  is 
her  duty,  to  watch  over  the  purity  of  the  faith,  and  to  inllict 
punishment,  even  corporal  punishment,  upon  those  ot  her 
children  who  forsake  the  truth  and  become  a  stumbling 
block  to  their  brethren.  This  undeniable  right,  which  tlows 
from  the  verv  powers,  which  Jesus  Christ  conlided  to  her, 
the  Church  lias  ahvays  exercised;  she  always  regarded  the 
crimes  of  heresy,  apostasy  and  sacrilege  deserving  ot  punish- 
ment  as  much  as  attacks  against  the  property,  the  honor  and 

the  life  of  man. 
This  doctrine  and  this  conduct  of  the  Church  are  perfectly 

reasonable  and  legitimate. 

It  is  the  ri-ht  and  the  duty  of  every  pertect  society  to 
etTicaciously  lead  its  members  to  the  purpose  or  its  institu- 
tion and  to  \^-atch  over  its  own  preservation.    1  he  Ciiurch 
bein-  a  perfect  society,  established  by  Christ,  and  provided 
by  her  Divine  Founder  with  everything  necessary  for  her 
preservation  and  propagation,  possesses,  therefore  this  right, 
and  can  consequently  enact  laws  and  punish  those  ol  her 
subjects  who  will  not  obey  them.    If  they  prove  themselves 
in  everv  way  refractory  and  rebellious,  devios  et  contumaces, 
according-  to  the  expression  of  Benedict  XIV,  it  is  the  right 
and  the  duty  of  the  Church,  as  a  mother,  tender,  it  is  true, 
but  free  from  weakness,  to  correct  them,  in  order  that  pun- 
ishment  may  bring  them  ba:k  to  due  submission  and  prevent 
others  from  being  led  away  by  evil  example.    She  does  as 
the  father  of  a  family,  when  by  wise  and  elTective  measures, 


he  corrects  his  children  and  endeavors  to  preserve  his  hearth 
from  everything  that  might  disturb  its  peace  and  happiness. 
She  does  as  governments  do  every  day,  when  by  a  system 
of  vigorous  precautions  and  sanitary  enactments,  they  pre- 
vent the  introduction  of  cholera  or  other  epidemics;  or 
again,  when  they  appoint  a  body  of  special  agents  to  look 
after  malefactors,  conspirators,  assassins,  to  deliver  them 
over  to  the  vengeance  of  the  law,  and  to  render  impossible 
the  execution  of  their  evil  designs. 

What  the  rod  of  the  father  is  to  the  family,  what  to  civil 
society  are  sanitary  cordons,  medical  commissions,  the  police 
and  the  courts,  the  Inquisition  was  for  religious  society,  that 
is  to  say,  a  means  of  preservation  for  itself  and  for  its 

members. 

Christ  divinely  commissioned  His  Church  to  preach  and 
preserve  His  religion  unchanged  among  all  nations  to  the 
end  of  time.  For  this  purpose  He  conferred  upon  the 
Apostles  the  power  of  teaching  and  ruling,  of  making  laws 
and  judging  and  punishing  transgressors.  Similar  powers 
are  conferred  by  God,  the  author  of  civil  society,  upon 
temporal  rulers  for  its  preservation  and  the  attainment  of 
every  temporal  good.  Shall  we  say  that  the  Son  of  God 
failed  to  make  such  provision  for  the  preservation  of  the 
religious  society  He  founded  and  for  the  eternal  welfare  of 
souls!  Hence,  as  Archbishop  Mesmer  remarks  ("Christian 
Apologetics,"  page  476,  note),  "in  the  light  of  Catholic 
dogma  it  is  always  a  crime  in  an  adult  Catholic  to  wander 
from  the  faith.  The  Church  teaches  (a)  that  faith  is  an 
imperative  duty  of  man  toward  God,  as  ^vithout  faith  it  is 
impossible  to  please  God'  (Heb.  xi-6) ;  (b)  that  this  faith 
is  a  supernatural  gift  of  God,  which  man,  once  he  has 
received,  can  not  lose  except  by  his  own  free  will:  (c)  that 
She  herself  is  the  divinely  appointed  and  infallible  teacher 
of  revealed  truth,  which  is  the  proper  object  of  divine  faith; 
(d)  that  there  can  not  possibly  be  any  reason  whatever  of 
denying  His  faith  once  professed;  (e)  that  consequently  to 


14 


The    Inquisition 


wander  from  llie  Catholic  faith  is  a  mi:)st  grievous  sin  against 
God  and  Hi.  holy  c:hurch;'    From  this  it  follows  evidently 
that  the  Catholic'  Clun-ch  alone,  proved,  in  its  proper  place, 
to  be  a  divine  instittition,  can  consistently  claim  the  right 
of  punishing;-  apostasy  from  the  faith,  and  that  no  State 
can  consistently  ptit  heresy  on  its  criminal  code,  unless  it 
professes  the  Catholic  faith,  and  becomes  thus  responsible 
for  its  preservation  as  a  means  of  peace  and  tmion  of  its 
Catholic  subjects.     Then,   io  institute   a  comparison,   the 
intolerance  of  Caiholi:s  practically  consists  in  this  that  they 
believe  our  Blessed  Lord  has  made  His  revelation  stilticiently 
clear  for  all  men  to  recognize  it  and  embrace  it,  if  they 
will     Still,  no  Catholic  is  allowed  to  coerce  or  intluence 
those  who  refuse  to  recognize  it.    While  the  intolerance  of 
Protestants  consists  in  this  that  they  believe  every  one  must 
be  left  to  his  private  judgment  in  ascertaining  the  trtie  relig- 
ion.    But,  as  history  proves,  they  persecuted  those  who, 
makinii-  tise  of  their  freedom  and  private  judgment,  seek  to 
beconie  Catholic..     This  is  a  literal  fulfilment  of  the  Sav- 
iour's prediction  when  He  said,  "And  a  man's  enemies  shall 
be  they  of  his  own  household"  (Matth.x-36). 

Here  the  reader  mav  consult  with  profit  "Christian  Apolo- 
getics"   (Vol.    II,    page    558);    "The    Intolerance    of    the 

Church."  ■ 

The  followini^-  remarks  from  Guggenberger  s  General 
History  of  the  Christian  Era"  (Vol.  II,  page  120)  will  clear 
up  still  more  the  question  at  issue. 
/  (a)  The  Chtirch  always  recognized  the  distinction  between 
the  baptized  and  the  unbaptized.  The  former  becoming 
rebels  by  apostacy  do  not  cease  to  be  her  subjects,  and  may 
be  lawfully  coerced  and  ptmished.  The  latter  not  l^eing  her 
subjects  can  not  be  forced  to  accept  the  faith,  or  punished 

for  rejecting  it. 

(b)  In  the  case  of  Christians  guilty  of  heresy  the  Church 
is  bound,  first,  to  admonish  and  warn  them  in  all  charity  and 
patience,  to  impose  penalties   calculated    to   change   their 


The    Inquisition  1^ 

minds,  and  finally,  all  other  means  failing,  to  excommunicate  v/ 

them. 

(c)  The  Chtirch  always  considered  heresy  in  a  Catholic 
State  as  an  offense  not  only  against  faith,  but  also  against 
civil  society  equivalent  to  high  treason,  as  a  felonious  attack 
upon  the  highest  good  of  the  commonwealth,  the  tinity  of 
faith,  and  therefore  ptinishable  by  the  civil  authority  on  its 
own  account.  For  what  is  done  against  the  divine  religion 
is  an  injtiry  done  to  all,  and  it  is  a  far  more  grievous  crime 
to  oflend  the  divine  than  the  human  Majesty.  In  the  Middle 
Age,  the  golden  era  of  Christianity,  every  person  who  pub- 
licly erred  in  doctrine  and  thus  became  an  obstacle  to  salva- 
tion, both  to  himself  and  others,  was  regarded  as  an  enemy 
to  civil  society,  to  be  punished  accordingly. 

(d)  While  the  Church  declared  it  lawful  for  the  State, 
in  the  above  suppositions,  to  ptmish  obstinate  heretics  as 
disturbers  of  both  religious  and  political  unity  and  peace,  / 
she  never  declared  it  necessary  or  always  expedient  to  do  so.  ' 
The  right  of  punishing  or  repressing  heresy  becomes  a  duty 
only  when  severe  measures  are  deemed  indispensable  for  the 
protection  of  the  faithful,  and  the  preservation  of  human 
society. 

10.  B.  OxV  THE  Part  OF  Tin:  State.  When  it  comes  to 
jtidging  of  the  legitimacy  of  an  institution,  we  must  go  back 
to  \hd  times  during  which  it  was  established.  All  his- 
torical students  know  that  at  the  time  of  the  Inqtiisition 
Etiropean  society  was  profoundly  Christian ;  people  were  as 
convinced  of  the  truth  of  Catholic  dogmas  as  in  our  day  in 
modern  society  they  are  convinced  of  the  truths  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  natural  law;  they  thought  with  good  reason  that 
revolt  against  God  was  no  less  culpable  than  revolt  against 

the  King. 

Rulers  and  people,  moreover,  considered  the  preservation 
•  of  the  Catholic  religion,  in  their  eyes  the  only  true  and  divine      ^ 
religion,  as  a  social  good  of  fjui^^reateMmj^^  . 

worldly  possessions.    The  legislation  of  all  the  countries  of  -^^W 


t 


( 


j| 


/i 


% 


16 


The   Inquisition 


1'  h  e    Inquisition 


17 


Europe  was  founded  upon  tlie  close  allian:e  of  Cnurch  and 
State.  Consequently,  every  disobedience  to  the  laws  ot 
religion  became  amenable  to  the  civil  law  as  soon  as  the 
transgressions  became  manifest  by  exterior  acts. 

hi  such  a  condition  of  things  nothing  could  be  more 
natural  than  the  establishment  of  tribunals,  whose  purpose  it 
was  to  ascertain  by  honest  and  legal  means  exterior  viola- 
tions of  the  religious  law,  to  distinguish  obstinate  heretics 
from  these  who  only  yielded  to  temporary  error,  to  punish 
the  really  guilty  and  proclaim  the  innocence  of  the  others. 
These  tribunals  were  as  legitimate  as  in  our  day  are  the 
courts  called  upon  to  judge  crimes  against  the  State  or 
against  the  person,  the  reputation  or  the  fortune  ot  its  sub- 
jects. We  say  exterior  violations,  for  it  is  clear  that  the 
interior  secret  of  conscience  is  accessible  to  God  alone;  con- 
sequently human  law  can  not  make  laws  for  interior  acts, 
nor  punish  violations  which  are  not  outwardly  produced. 
Hence  the  principle  of  canon  law,  ^'Ecclesia  non  iudicat  de 

internis." 

It  is  because  they  were  imbued  with  these  truths  that 
Theodosius  the  Great,  Justinian,  Charlemagne,  Otho  the 
Great,  Louis  XI,  all  the  rulers  and  all  civilized  nations  did 
not  Lhiuk  that  to  punish  heresy  and  apostasy  was  to  do 
violence  to  conscience. 

11.  Conclusion.  In  a  society  constituted  according  to 
the  principles,  which  we  have  just  set  forth  and  in  presence 
of  legislative  measures  enacted  accordingly,  no  one  can  rea- 
sonably deny  that  the  Church  acted  with  wisdom,  by  estab- 
lishing  conjointly  with  the  temporal  power,  to  which  it  left 
the  task  of  intlicting  the  merited  punishment,  a  tribunal  to 
ascertain  with  greater  certainty  and  guarantee  of  justice  the 
real  ctilprits,  and  to  take  cognizance  of  offenses  rightly  con- 
sidered as  most  detrimental  both  to  social  order  and  religious 

faith. 

12.  Rh^iahk.  If  there  are  men  who  find  it  difficult  to 
admit  this  conclusion,  it  is  because  we  live  in  an  atmosphere 


which  is  saturated  with  errors.    To  favor  the  spread  of  evil, 
and  for  tlieir  own  security,  the  enemies  of  religion  constantly 
represent  all  repression  of  impiety  and  heresy  as  an  outrage 
against  what  they  falsely  call  the  sacred  rights  of  conscience. 
It  is  nevertheless  beyond  all  doubt  that  no  man  can  claim 
for  himself  the  right  to  do  evil.     It  is  certain  that  man  has 
not  and  can  not  have,  as  some  pretend  in  our  day,  the  nat- 
ural  and   inviolable   right  to  think,   write   and   propagate 
everything  that  pleases  him.    Created  by  God,  and  depend- 
ing upon  Him  in  every  respect,  he  has  not  the  right  to 
launch  forth  outrage  and  blasphemy  against  the  Author  of 
his  existence.    Becoming  a  child  of  the  Church  by  baptism, 
he  has  not  the  right  to  rise  in  revolt  against  his  Mother  and  to 
fight  her.    As  a  member  of  society  he  has  not  the  right  to 
strive  to  sap  the  foundations  upon  w^hich  society  rests. 
Endowed  with  free  will,  enabling  him  to  do  what  is  good 
and  just  meritoriously,  he  has  not  the  right  to  abuse  it,  and   ^ 
so  corrupt  the  morals  of  his  brethren  and  bring  them  to  ruin. 
It  is  equally  undeniable  that  there  are  errors  which  are  cul- 
pable.   Indeed,  there  are  failings  of  reason  which  practically 
can  not  be  distinguished  from  moral  perversion.     Man  is 
obliged  above  all  to  adhere  to  the  truth  and  to  preserve  his 
intelligence  free  from  error;  this  is  evident,  for  in  order  to 
will,  it  is  necessary  to  know,  and  to  will  jtistly,  it  is  necessary 
to  know  correctly.    If  there  were  no  rule  for  thought,  there 
could  not  be  any  rule  for  action.    What  would  then  l^ecome  of 
morality  and  society  ?    A  man  who  tolerates  error,  knowing  it 
to  be  error,  must  be  either  full  of  malice  or  a  most  despicable 
character.    No  mathematician  would  listen  to  a  false  propo- 
sition in  mathematics,  without  correcting  it;  ,and  no  good 
lawyer  allows  his  friends  to  make  a  fallacious  assumption  in 
a  legal  matter  without  telling  them  of  their  error.    Can  we 
then  suppose  that  a  man-of  integrity,  who  knows  the  truth, 
and  knows  that  he  has  it  from  God  Himself  through  the 
appointed  channels  of  communication,  would  act  as  if  that 
truth  were  no  better  than  fiction?     Hen:£^-^v^fe'^-CathaUG- 


-t 


V 


/ 


/ 


18 


The    Inquisition 


The    Inquisition 


19 


/ 


that  is  sincere,  Mntolerankand  if  he  is  not  intolerant,  he  is 
eiUier  a  hypocrite,  or  else  ne  does  not  really  believe  what  he 
professes.'   Among  culpable  errors,  stand  foremost  the  sins 
of  unbelief,  hereby  and  apostasy.     In  reality,  is  lliere  any 
outrage  ai^ainst  the  honor,  the  life  or  the  property  ot  a  man, 
a  mei-e  creature,  which  can  be  compared,  as  to  gravity,  with 
these  great  crimes,  which  directly  attack  the  Creator  Him- 
self^ '\o  refuse  obstinately  to  believe  in  ihe  revelation  of 
God,  sutlicienlly  known  as  su:h,  is  a  crime  of  high  treason 
against  the  Divinitv,  f^^r  it  is  to  deny  and  impugn  in  a 
manner  the  veracity  of  God.    Now,  at  the  time  and  in  the 
countries  where  the  Inquisition  existed,  it  was  easy  for  all  to 
have  a  complete  moral  certitude  (proportionate,  however, 
to  the  mental  condition  and  development  of  each  man)  con- 
cerning the  divinity  of  the  Christian  religion  and  the  truth  of 
the  Catholic  Church.     It  would  be  well  to  read  Chapter 
xxxiv   entitled:    "Tolerance  in  Matters  of  Religion,"  in  the 
ex^ellent    w,)rk    of    Balmes,    entitled,  "Protestantism    and 
Catholicity  Compared  in  their  Et^ects  on  the  Civilization  of 
Europe." 

HI -WHAT  SHOULD  BE  THOUGHT  OF  THE  PRO- 
CEEDINGS  OF  THE  INQUISITION  IN  GENERAL 
AND  OF  THE  SPANISH  INQUISITION  IN  PAR- 
TICULAR. 

13.  We  have  just  proven  that  the  Inquisition  was  legit- 
imate in  principle;  and  that  in  the  times  and  ountries,  where 
it  was  established,  there  existed  the  right  to  punish  those 
found  guilty  ^^i  propagating  religious  errors.  Writers  like 
Llorenie,  Limbroch,  Prescott  and  others,  in  pi:turing  the 
Spanish  Inquisition  in  the  blackest  colors,  as  an  unanswera- 
ble proof  of  the  intolerance  and  cruelty  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  H'ith  whom  they  completely  identify  it,  take  it  for 
granted'  that  all  the  condemned  were  innocent,  or,  at  most, 
misguided  persons  who  suffered  martyrdom  for  their  honest 


religious  convictions.  This  may  be  interesting  reading  in 
sensational  works  of  fiction,  but  it  is  not  history.  The  aim 
of  such  writers  is  to  pander  to  the  prejudices  and  morbid 
tastes  of  a  certain  class  of  readers  who,  like  the  authors  of 
such  works,  are  utterly  regardless  of  honesty  and  truth.  But 
should  we  not  severely  condemn  the  manner  in  which  this 
right  was  exercised?  Was  there  not  cruelty  in  executing  the 
sentences  pronounced  against  the  criminals?  This  is  the 
question  now  to  be  examined.  We  shall  solve  it  by  the  aid 
of  a  few  remarks. 

14.     FiKST  Remauk.    This  question  is  far  from  having 
the  same  importance  as  the  first.    It  would  be  indeed  absurd 
to  reproach  the  Church  with  the  abuses,  of  which  the  judges 
of  the  Inquisition  may  have  been  guilty.    As  we  can  reason- 
ably impute  to  a  man  only  the  acts  and  effects  which  are 
the  result  of  his  personal  activity,  in  the  same  way  we  can 
reproach  a  social  body  only  with  what  is  the  result  of  its 
nature  and  social  action,  in  other  words,  of  its  constitutive 
principles,  of  its  laws,,  and  of  the  regular  exercise  of  its 
authority.    Who,  indeed,  would  consider  himself  justified  in 
holding  civil  law  or  military  rules  responsible  for  abuses 
of  authority  committed  by  the  violation  of  these  laws  and 
rules,  which  the  civil  and  military  authority  have  enacted, 
and  whose  transgression  they  rightly  condemn  and  punish? 
Now,  the  abuses  which  are  brought  forward  against  the 
Inquisition  are  far  from  being  the  result  of  the  principles  of 
Catholicism;  they  are,  on  the  contrary,  radically  opposed 
to  its  spirit,  and,  in  fact,  they  have  been  severely  blamed  by 
the  Sovereign  Pontiff's  every  time  that  they  were  brought  to 
their  notice.    As  history  proves,  it  must  be  said  to  the  ever- 
lasting credit  of  the  Roman  Pontiff's,  that  they  never  favored 
the  Spanish  Inquisition.     Leo  X  wished  to  abolish  it  alto- 
gether.    Paul  III,  Pius  IV,  and  Gregory  XIII  strenuously 
opposed  its  introduction  into  the  Kingdom  of  Naples,  and 
the  Duchy  of  Milan,  then  subject  to  the  Spanish  Crown. 
15.     From  the  beginning  of  the  action  of  the  Spanish 


l/' 


1 


■), 


T  li  e    Inquisition 


Inquisition,  Pope  Sixtus  I\'  was  very  ill  contented  with  it, 
and  uri^-ed  his  objections  so  strongly,  that  the  ambassadors 
of  both  courts  were  ordered  to  leave  their  respective  stations, 
and  Ferdinand  commanded  all  his  subjects  to  leave  Rome. 
The  Pope  at  last  made  concessions  by  the  Bull  of  November 
1   1478.    On  receiving  further  accounts  of  the  cruelties  done 
by  the '  Inquisitors  of  Seville,  he  retracted  the  i3ull,  and 
ordered  that  in  future  the  Inquisitors  should  pass  no  judg- 
ment without  the  assistance  of  the  Bishops.     He  further 
commanded  that  the  Inquisition  should  not  be  established  in 
any  other  Province,  there  being  already  the  ordinary  tri- 
bunals of  the  Bishops.     When  Isabella  afterwards  desired 
the  withdrawal  of  the  decree,  whi:h  ordered  the  Bisnops  to 
sit  with  the  Inquisitors,  Pope  Sixtus  IV  courteously,  but 
firmlv,  refused.     The  next  year,  in  order  to  temper  the 
severity  of  the  Inquisition,  he  appointed  Manrique,  Arch- 
bishop  of  Seville,  as  Papal  Judge  of  Appeals  for  all  Spain, 
before  whom  all  who  thought  themselves  unjustly  treated  by 
the  Inquisitors,  could  take  their  cases.    He  further  gave  an 
appeal  from  the  Archbishop  to  himself.    The  Holy  Father 
thus  quashed  many  prosecutions  and  softened  the  punish- 
ments in  other  cases.    He,  moreover,  required  that  all  those 
who  abjured  their  heresy  should  be  treated  with  the  utmost 
leniency;  and  conjured  the  King  and  Queen,  "by  the  bowels 
of  mercy  in  Jesus  Christ,"  to  show  more  tenderness  to  their 
subjects— to  those  even  who  had  unfortunately  fallen  into 
error.     But  King  Ferdinand,  and  afterwards  the  Emperor 
Charles  V,  replied  by  endeavoring  to  stop  appeals  from  being 

carried  to  Rome. 

Leo  X  (1519)  excommunicated  all  the  officers  of  the  tri- 
bunal of  Toledo  for  their  excessive  severity.  He  demanded 
that  all  false  witnesses  should  be  punished  according  to  the 
rigor  of  the  law,  so  as  to  deter  others  from  such  a  criminal 

course. 

It  is  well  known  that  writers  of  a  certain  school  system- 
atically hostile  to  Rome  think  to  find  in  the  Spanish  Inquisi- 


T  h  e    I  n  q  u  i  s  i  t  i  o  n 


21 


tion  ample  justification  of  their  attitude  toward  the  Catholic 
Church.    But  there  is  an  answer  to  this  charge,  and  a  very 
plain  one.     The  Spanish  Inquisition  was,  as  we  remarked 
above,  a  mixed  court,  viz.,  a  politico— ecclesiastical  tribunal; 
and  as  it  was  to  take  cognizance,  among  other  things,  of 
religious  matters,  the  Spanish  Government  could  not  estab- 
lish it  without  the  intervention  of  the  spiritual  authority 
competent  to  judge  of  such  topics.    But  as  Dr.  Brownson 
remarks  (Vol.  XII,  page  27),  "it  was  solicited  by  the  Spanish 
kings,  and  conceded,  though  reluctantly,  by  the  Pope,  not 
as  a  tribunal  against  peaceable  and  inoi^'ensive  heretics,  but, 
if  there  be  any  truth  in  history,  it  was  established  for  the  . 
purpose  of  ferreting  out  and  bringing  to  light  persons  who 
were  secretly  conspiring  against  royalty,  as  well  as  against 
religion;  men  plotting  in  secret  to  overthrow  both  Church 
and  State  by  a  violent  and  bloody  revolution ;  persons  whom 
our  own  laws  would  condemn  and  punish  as  criminals. 
That  the  secular  power  was  guilty  in  some  instances  of 
injustice  and  cruelty  in  dealing  with  the  accused,  we  do  not 
deny ;  but  the  Church  can  not  be  held  responsible  for  abuses 
that  proceeded  from  the  violation  of  her  injunctions,  and 
against  which  the  Roman  Pontiffs  loudly  protested  on  many 
occasions  sternly  rebuking  the  Inquisitors  for  their  intem- 
perate zeal.    We  are  far  from  defending  or  justifying  such 
abuses,  though  we  lifmly  believe  there  has  been  much  false- 
hood and  exaggeration  in  the  case."    Abuses  occurred  only 
because  that  tribunal  was  gradually  withdrawn  from  the 
authority  and  intluence  of  the  Holy  See,  and  had  been  turned 
into  a  political  machine  to  further  political  ends.     It  is  a 
well  known  fact  that  the  decrees  of  Rome  protesting  against 
excesses,  annulling  sentences  passed  in  Spain,  ordering  trials 
to  be  transferred  to  Rome,  were  often  ignored  by  the  royal 
officials,  and  papal  letters  addressed  to  the  Inquisitors  were 
intercepted  by  Spanish  Ministers  and  never  reached  their 
destination.    Llorente  tries  to  take  the  edge  off  these  remon- 
strances of  the  Holy  See  by  insinuating  that  they  sprang 


7 


>. 


iiiilll 


OT 


T  h  e    I  n  q  u  i  5  i  t  i  n  n 


from  the  base  niuiive  of  cupidity;  that  the  Popes  had  an 
eye  on  the  fees  they  could  extort  as  the  pri:e  of  their  aoso- 
lutioii.     The  insinuation  is  an  atro:ious  caUimny,  a  charge 
as  bold  as  it  is  untrue.     It  is  triumphantly  refuted  by  the 
Protestant  historian,  Leopold  Ranke,  ^v'ho,  in  ITis  work  enti- 
tled, '-Princes  and  Peoples"   (\ol.  1,  page  241),  distinctly 
asserts  that  all  prohts  derived  from  the  confiscations  ordered 
by  that  tribunal  went  to  the  King,  and  that  the  proceeds 
of  the  collected  fines  formed  a  regular  revenue  of  the  royal 
exchequer.     Hence  the  frequent  complaints  ot  the  Spanish 
kmgs  that  the  Pope,  by  receiving  appeals  and  granting  secret 
absolutions,  defrauded  the  royal  treasury  of  considerable 
revenues.    The  Church  never  received  a  cent,  as  it  was  one 
of  the  standing  rules  that  the  decisions  of  the  Roman  Court 
should  be  given  gratis  in  every  case. 

16.    Second  Riai-viiK.    Even  if  the  accusations  of  wan- 
ton crueltv  luid  bloodshed,  charged  against  the  Inquisition, 
were  x^-elfgrounded,  this  wotild  be  no  argument  against  the 
legilima:v^3t  that  tribunal.    To  prove  an  abuse  of  a  thing 
does  not"  prove  the  necessity  of  suppressing  the  lawful  use 
of  it;  otherwise  every  human  institution  or  invention  would 
have' to  be  put  down,  and  not  even  railways,  telegraphs  and 
telephones  would  escape.    An  institution  is  deservedly  con- 
demned only  when  the  abuses  are  not  accidental,  but  spring 
necessarilv  from  its  essential  character;  that  is,  when  the 
abuse  is  the  eliect  caused  by  the  institution  itself.     Apply 
these  considerations  to  the  Roman  Inquisition,  of  which  we 
^peak  now.    The  mode  of  proceeding  against  acctised  per- 
^  sons  was  accuratelv  defined  by  Bulls  of  the  Popes,  and  by 
canon  law.     No  one  could  even  be  imprisoned  until  his 
guilt  had  been  clearlv  established  before  a  judicial  tribunal. 
No  one  could  be  worried  by  excessive  delays  in  conducting 
the  trial.     There  were  stringent  rules  with  regard  to  the 
character  of  witnesses,  and  false  testimony  was  treated  with 
the  utmost  severity.    The  judges  were  ordered  never  to  con- 
demn anvone  except  on  the  clearest  proofs  of  guilt,  lor,  as 


illL, 


The    Inquisition 


23 


the  Pontiffs  said,  it  is  better  that  crime  should  go  unpun- 
ished than  that  even  one  innocent  man  should  be  punished 
as  guilty.     Moreover,  it  must  be  noted  that  contession  of 
guilt  would  at  once  have  exempted  the  acctised  from  all 
punishment,  or  at  least  have  secured  so  great  a  mitigation  of 
its  rigor  that  it  ceased  to  deserve  the  name.    Here  Prescott 
is  guilty  of  downright  falsehood  when  he  asserts  that  penal- 
ties were  indiscriminately  intlicted  on  all  the  accused,  whether 
they  confessed  their  guilt  or  remained  obstinate,  and  that 
few  among  those  suspected  of  heresy  could  escape  the  fury 
of  that  dread  tribunal.     The  charge  is  too  infamous  to 
deserve  a  refutation.    The  truth  of  the  matter  is  that  who- 
soever confessed  his  guilt  and   promised  to  reform   was 
absolved  and  immediately  set  free.     (See  Parson's  "Studies 
in  Church  History,"  Vol.  II,  page  408.)     What  other  tri- 
bunal is  there,  it  has  been  justly  asked,  where  a  plea  of 
guilty  would  be  followed  by  such  merciful  consequences? 
We  have  here  a  perfect  imitation  ^of  what  actually  takes 
place  in  the  tribunal  of  penance,  where  sincere  confession  of 
guilt    is    invariably   followed    by    Sacramental    absolution. 
Behold  here  how  closely  the  Church,  in  her  legislation,  imi- 
tates the  mercy  of  her  divine  Founder!     Hence  we  have 
reason  to  conclude  that  the  proceedings  of  the  Inqtiisition 
were  far  more  just  than  those  of  any  judicial  court  in 
Europe. 

17.  Tiiiui)  Rkmahk.  It  is  important  to  recall  the  state- 
ments of  an  eminent  writer,  Abbe  De  Vayrac,  L'Etat  present 
d'Espagne,  on  the  mode  of  procedtire  followed  by  that  tri- 
bunal : 

(1)  Its  officers  were  chosen  from  the  most  respectable 

and  competent  personages  of  the  realm. 

(2)  All  accusations  presented  to  it  were  to  be  received 
with  extreme  dilficulty,  and  informers  were  severely  pun- 
ished when  judicially  convicted  of  falsehood.  According  to 
Simancas,  one  of  the  most  prominent  lawyers  of  the  six- 
teenth  century    (^'Catholic    Institutions    Against    Heresy," 


24 


The    Inquisition 


The    Inquisition 


25 


1552),  no  one  could  be  arrested  unless  accused  by  three 
ditYerent  witnesses,  each  of  whom  was  to  be  ready  to  swear 
that  he  was  telling  the  truth,  and  was  not  actuated  by  any 
malice.  If  he  relapsed  but  soon  repented,  he  was  released. 
Onl\'  on  the  third  conviction  the  accused  was  finally  con- 
signed to  the  civil  court  for  judgment. 

(3)  To  the  accused  was  immediately  assigned  an  advocate 
or  counsel  to  defend  them,  and  if  the  first  hearing  showed 
the  innocence  of  the  accused,  they  were  at  once  set  free. 

This  is  a  striking  contrast  to  the  English  code  of 
former  days,  when  no  counsel  was  allowed  to  the  accused, 
and  the  charges  made  against  them  were  not  known  to  them 
until  they  came  into  court  to  be  tried. 

But  the  accused  had  the  right  of  summoning  witnesses  in 
their  defense  from  the  remotest  regions,  even  from  beyond 
the  sea,  and  ample  time  was  given  to  secure  their  presence. 

(4)  No  sentence  of  subordinate  judges  could  be  executed 
without  the  assent  of  the  supreme  tribunal,  whose  duty  it 
was  to  revise  the  whole  process  and  either  approve  or  reject 
the  verdict,  according  to  the  evidence  elicited  from  its  acts. 

(5)  The  interrogatory,  or  what  we  might  call  the  cross- 
examination,  always  took  place  before  two  priests  not  con- 
nected with  the  Inquisition,  whose  duty  was  to  prevent  all 
violence  and  arbitrary  proceeding.  No  one  could  be  even 
confined  to  prison  unless  condemned  by  a  unanimous  vote 
of  all  the  judges.  It  is  true  that  from  the  persons  accused 
were  concealed  the  names,  both  of  their  accusers  and  of  the 
witnesses,  but  this  was  wisely  and  prudently  done,  says  the 
Protestant  historian,  Ranke,  in  order  to  protect  them  against 
the  hatred  and  revenge  of  powerful  noblemen  and  their 
sympathizers  and  adherents. 

However,  this  secrecy  was  common  in  all  the  tri- 
bunals of  those  days,  and  the  eminent  jurist,  Jeremy  Ben- 
Iham,  admits  that  in  many  cases  such  secrecy  may  be  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  public  security,  even  in  our  times.  (Vol. 
II,  page  191.) 


We  must,  moreover,  remember  that  the  judges  appointed 
to  impose  corporal  penalties  for  the  crime  of  heresy  were 
civil  judges;  the  otiice  of  the  ecclesiastical  authority  being 
that  of  e'stablishing  the  guilt- of  the  accused,  a  task  entirely 
beyond  the  competence  of  the  secular  rulers.  Wherever  the. 
tribunal  intlicted  severe  or  excessive  punishment,  death  espe- 
cially, the  government  was  the  agent;  it  is  the  government, 
therefore,  that  must  bear  the  blame,  when  blame  is  rightly 
deserved.  Moreover,  as  we  have  seen,  the  State,  Christian 
and  Catholic,  in  lending  to  the  Church  the  aid  of  the  secular 
arm,  was  only  fuUilling  a  duty,  that  of  safe-guarding  the 
sacred  rights  of  conscience  and  truth,  and  of  protecting  from 
all  danger  the  paramount  interests  of  civil  society.     (See 

(No.  10.) 

^  Divine  authority  and  Christian  tradition  amply  justify 
secular  princes  in  aiding  the  Church  with  their  power.  Thus 
the  Jewish  people  were  commanded  to  try,  and,  after  sen- 
tence, to  stone  any  one,  whoever  he  might  be,  who  blas- 
phem'ed  the  Lord,  or  counseled  them  to  apostatize,  viz.,  to 
depart  from  the  worship  of  the  true  God.  (See  Leviticus, 
ch.  xxiv,  V.  14.)  St.  Augustine  (d.  A.  D.  470)  defended, 
or  rather  urged  the  most  strenuous  measures  against  the 
D<^natists  (furious  heretics  of  the  fourth  century),  in  order 
to  repress  them.  This,  he  said,  is  the  proper  exercise  of 
the  power  (secular)  instituted  by  God,  also  for  the  preserva- 
tion and  defense  of  the  Church.  His  doctrine  on  this  point 
is  tersely  expressed  in  the  following  sentence  of  his  ninety- 
third  letter,  n.  ix:  "Serviant  reges  terrae  Christo,  etiam  leges 
ferendo  pro  Christo"  (Let  Kings  serve  Christ  also  by  making 
laws  in  favor  of  Christ). 

Moreover,  clemency,  which  plays  so  great  a  part  in  the 
judgments  of  the  Inquisition,  was  the  work  of  the  Church, 
who  did  nothing  as  to  the  punishments  except  to  suppress  '/ 
or  mitigate  them,  or  to  recommend  the  guilty  to  the  indul- 
gence of  the  judges.  (See  the  ''Life  of  Ximenes,"  by  Hefele, 
translated  from  the  German  by  the  Rev.  Canon  Dalton,  ch. 


/ 


y 


1 


1 


26 


The    1  n  q  u  i  s  i  1  i  o  n 


The    Inquisition 


27 


\J 


16,  17,  18.)     Hence  the  reputation  for  mercy  which  the 
ecclesiastical  tribunals  of  the  inquisition  enjoyed.    This  repu- 
tation was  so  great  that  the  Knights  Templars  expressly 
bt^^cd  to  be  judged  by  the  tubunals  of  ihe  Ecclesiasdcal 
hiquisition.     They  knew  well,  historians  said,  thai  if  Uiey 
secured  such  judges,  they  could  not  be  condemned  to  the 
penalty  of  death.    But  Philip  the  Fair,  who  had  determined 
upon  their  destruction,  and  who  understood  the  inevitable 
consequence  of  a  re:ourse  to  ihat  tribunal,  shut  himself  up 
v/ith  his  Council  of  State  and  summarily  condemned  them 
to  death.    And  in  our  day,  it  was  at  Rome  that  the  Jews 
received  the  best  treatment;   indeed,   a  proverbial  phrase 
calls  the  city  of  the  Popes  the  paradise  of  the  Jews.  ^  In 
(jermany,  where  formerly  there  were  many  ecclesiastical 
sovereignties,  there  was  another  proverb,  which  said:   'it  is 
good  to  live  under  the  Crozier."    "Never,"  says  Joseph  de 
Maistre,  ''under  these  pacific  governments  was  there  a  ques- 
tion of  persecution  or  of  capital  punishment  against  the 
spiritual  enemies  of  the  reigning  power."   The  action  of  the 
Popes  in  regard  to  the  Inquisition  is  quite  in  keeping  with 
the  character  that  has  always  been  noticeable  in  the  occu- 
pants of  the  papal  throne.    The  Popes,  as  individuals,  have 
had,  of  course,  their  personal  qualities.     Some  have  been 
sterner,  others  milder,  in  their  temperament  and  in  their 
rule.    But  tlie  Holy  See  has  all  along  stood  out  among  the 
thrones  of  Christendom  conspicuous  for  its  love  of  merc^^ 
and  tenderness  toward  the  erring  and  sutfering.     in  short, 
whilst  we  are  far  from  excusing  the  excesses  of  this  tribunal, 
i  we  maiiitam  at  the  same  time,  that  crime  was  never  sanc- 
j  Honed  by  the  Church,  that  bloodshed  and  persecution  form 
'  no  pari  of  her  creed,  and  that  all  abuse  of  power  and  the 
cruelties  incidental  to  it  are  to  be  traced  to  the  despotism  of 
the  State,  and  not  to  the  action  of  the  Church.    This  is  the  ^ 
tinal  verdict  oi  all  iionest  and  impartial  historians  of  the  ^ 
Spanish  Inquisiiion.     (See  Balutli,  ''Charity  of  the  Churchy 
Toward  the  Jews,'  ch.  xxii.) 


18  FoLKTU  Ri-MAKK.  It  is  to  give  proof  of  great  iguor- 
ance  of  history  or  of  singular  hardihood  in  calumny  to 
represent  cruel  tortures  as  the  distinctive  and  exclusive 
characteristic  of  the  Inquisition.  This,  however,  is  whai  is 
done  every  day  by  anti-religious  books,  newspapers  and 

reviews.  . 

In  reality  these  tortures  were  in  universal  use.  I  hey 
were  thought  necessary  to  intimidate  the  guilty.  It  would 
even  be  an  easy  task  to  prove  that,  taking  all  m  all,  the 
tribunals  of  the  Inquisition  proved  themselves  in  general 
much  more  equitable  and  less  rigorous  towards  the  accused 
than  any  other  civil  tribunals  of  those  times.  Hetele,  in 
the  work  already  cited,  where  so  many  interesting  lacts  con- 
cerning  the  Inquisition  of  Spain  are  to  be  lound,  has  been 
able  to  give  proof  of  this  even  as  regards  that  country,  the 
most  exposed  to  blame,  and  he  nas  been  able  to  do  this  even 
while  accepting  the  data  of  Llorente,  the  partial  and  untrust- 
worthy historian  of  the  Inquisition.  ^ 

19  '  It  is  principally  upon  the  testimony  of  Llorente  tnat 
the  enemies  of  the  Inquisition  ground  their  charges.    To  be 
convinced  of  the  Utile  contidence  due  to  the  assertions  of 
Llorente   it  is  enough  to  know  that  after  writing  his  work 
he  was  careful  to  destroy  tiie  original  documents  relative  to 
that  mu:h  maligned  institution.     By  so  doing  he  hoped 
therebv  that  it  would  be  impossilie  to  verify  his  assertions 
and  contradict  his  statements.     A  little  history  concerning 
this  individual  will  not  be  out  of  place,  as  it  throws  consid- 
erable lii>ht  on  our  subject.    When,  on  May  10,  l8o8,  the 
victorious  advance  of  Napoleon  forced  Ferdinand  MI  to    ^ 
abdicate  the  throne  of  Spain,  Llorente  repaired  to  Bayonne, 
wh-re  he  turned  traitor  to  his  country  by  swearing  allegiance 
to  the  usurper  of  the  Spanish  crown,  Joseph  Bonaparte,  who 
made  him  Counsellor  of  State,  and  who  ordered  him  to 
write  a  history  of  the  Spanish  Inquisition,  with  a  promise  of 
a  liberal  compensation  for  his  labor.     The  venal  historian     • 
knew  full  well  what  kind  of  a  work  would  suit  the  palate 


i    /A 


/ 


1 


28 


The   Inquisition 


W 


of  liis  master,  and  he  wrote  accordingly.    Botli  Ins  patron 
and  tiie  hired  compiler  had  a  two-fold  object  in  view,  viz. : 
First  to  blacken  the  character  of  the  royal  dynasty,  and  thus 
inspire  into  the  Spanish  people  hatred  and  execration  of  tlieir 
legitimate  sovereigns.     Secondly,  to  fasten  on  the  Papa 
Court  the  responsibilitv  of  the  excessive  rigors  of  a  tribunal 
that   through  State  interference,  had  be:ome  more  political 
than  ecclesiastical  in  its  procedures.    Can  we  put  implicit 
fiitli  in  the  statements  of  such  an  historian,  who  wrote  with 
the  avowed  purpose  of  maligning  that  institution,  and  who, 
as  we  noticed  above,  burned  the  documents,  by  which  he 
could  have  been  convicted  of  falsehood  ?    A  degraded  priest 
and  a  venal  historian,  a  dismissed  otlicial  of  the  Inquisition, 
and  writing  for  the  deliberate  purpose  of  painting  it  in  ihe 
most  odious  colors,  he  is  justly  liable  to  suspicion,  whenever 
his  assertions  cannot  be  supported  by  other  independent 
testimony.     Let  me  bring  here  one  instance  out  of  many, 
that  migW  be  adduced,  in  which  Llorente  is  caught  flagrante 
delicto  telling  a  huge  lie.    The  Inquisition  was  established  in 
Spain  in  lhe\vear  1481;  and  this  venal  writer  tells  us  "that 
in  liie  verv  next  year  the  Tribunal  of  Seville  alone  burnt  not 
less  tlian  2,000  persons  belonging  to  the  dioceses  of  Seville 
and  Cadiz "     This  is  certainly  a  frightful  statement,  if  it 
were  only  true.    But  unfortunately  for  the  author's  reputa- 
tion for  honesty  the  figure  given  is  found  to  be  an  atrocious 
exaggeration,  implying    a    barefaced    falsehood.     In    fact, 
we  consulted  the  original  work  of  the  Spanish  historian,  the 
Jesuit  Father,  Mariana,  from  whom  Llorente  claims  to  have 
borrowed  that  statement,  and  found  that  the  total  ot  2,000 
persons  is  given,  not  for  one  year,  and  one  place,  but  for  all 
parts  of  Spain,  and  throughout  the  whole  period  of  Torque- 
mada's  Inquisitorship,  a  period  of  fifteen  years.     Surely  a 
man  who  could  substitute  for  a  yearly  average  of  133  per- 
sons   throuiihout  tlie  whole  of  Spain,  the  round  sum  of 
-^000  victims  in  one  city,  has  forfeited  all  claims  to  be 
considered  a  trtistworthy  writer.    We  should  come  to  the 


) 


The    Inquisition 


29 


same  conclusion  if  we  were  to  verify  other  assertions  of  his 
bv  comparing  notes,  viz.,  by  const.lting  the  books  and  do.u- 
meri'^^om  which  he  qtiotes,  but  which  it  was  no    in  his 
power  to  destroy.    And  this  shameful  Wf  "caHalsehood  > 
repeated  and  fully  endorsed  by  the  Encyclopoedia  Britannia 
(Vol    Xlll,  page  93,   Ninth  Hdition),  though  its  editor, 
asstired  their  readers  and  subscribers  tltat  it  was  not  to  be 
the  or-an  of  anv  sect  or  parly  in  scieitce  or  relig^n;  and 
th  t  ilrsworn  duty. was  to  give  an  account  of  the   acts  and 
an  impartial  summary  of  results  in  every  ^^^^ ^ 
inquiry  and  research.    This  flagrant  violation  of  their  fair 
promi'ses  proves  once  more  that  they  were  more  east  y  made 
lian  fulfilled,    ^'et  it  is  mainly  Llorente's  work  which  ha 
been  the  storehouse  of  weapons  in  the  hands  of  mhd      and 
Protestants  against  the  tribtinal  of  the  Inqt.isition     Prescot 

certainly  no  friend  either  to  the  '"^l^'^'^'^"  °VV  m  t  s 
Church  (in  his  history  of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella)  bears 
tesHmony  a.ainst  Llorente's  truthfulness  in  the  tollo^v'>ng 
woi'r  'One  might  reasonably  distrust  Llorente's  tab  es 
from  the  facility  with  which  he  receives  the  most  improbable 
estimates  in  other  matters."  Yet,  strange  to  say,  Prescot 
himself  frequently  bases  his  tmmeasured  strictures  on  the 
i;;"Lition  on  the  authority  of  Llorente,  the  very  witness 
against  whose  veracity  he  was  honest  eiiougn  to  test.  y.  So 
nttich  for  his  reputation  of  fairness  and  consistency!  (See 
Balmes,  "European  Civilization,"  note  in  Appenoix,  page 

\o  If  the  reader  desires  to  form  an  idea  of  what  the  tri- 
bunals were  in  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries,  he 
should  read  the  learned  memoir  of  M  Poullet,  professor  ot 
iurisprtidence  at  the  University  of  Lotivam:  Histoire  di 
5  oil  penal  dans  le  dt.che  de  Brabant  ("History  of  Penal 
Law  in  the  Duchy  of  Brabant").  We  quote  these  tew  pas- 
sages- "In  all  their  procedures  there  prevailed  uncertainty, 
want  of  regularity  and  arbitrary  dealings.  The  accused 
were  deprived  of  the  precious  guarantee  of  publicity  as  to  the 


\ 


30 


The   Inquisition 


The    Inquisition 


31 


V 


v 


proceedings;  the  judge  could,  if  he  pleased,  refuse  to  the 
accused  the  assistance  of  counsel,  and  the  supposed  criminal 
was  not  allowed  to  be  present  at  the  deposition  of  testi- 
mony/' Con:erning  the  penalties  in  use,  the  same  writer 
says:  "The  general  system  breathed  nothing  but  intimida- 
tion and  public  vengeance.  The  penalty  of  death  was  often 
accompanied  by  revolting  cruelties,  the  judges  endeavoring 
to  proportion  the  torments  accompanying  the  death  penally 
according  to  the  various  degrees  of  criminality  in  the  otlend- 
ers.  Besides  the  penalty  of  death,  the  law  recognized  only 
corporal  punishment,  often  producing  irreparable  conse- 
quences to  the  victim,  always  degrading.  Nothing  was  done 
to  reform  the  criminal  and  to  inspire  him  with  better  senti- 
ments before  returning  him  to  social  life.  Imprisonment 
was  only  resorted  to  as  a  punishment  and  in  cases  of  minor 
offenses.  It  had  no  place  in  the  penal  system  properly  so- 
called,  and  was  never  oraered,  wl-en  the  judge  was  about 
to  punish  a  crime  of  real  gravity." 

What  has  been  said  of  criminal  jurisprudence  in  Brabant 
applies  to  the  rest  of  Europe.  In  those  days  coiners  of  false 
money  were  burnt  alive;  those  who  gave  false  weights  and 
measures  were  sci^irged  or  were  condemned  to  death;  burg- 
lars were  led  to  the  scaffold ;  thieves  convicted  of  a  relapse 
were  also  condemned  to  death.  A  monument  of  the  extreme 
severity  of  the  civil  tribunals  was  the  Caroline,  the  penal 
code  of  Charles  \ ,  which  governed  the  German  Empire 
until  the  last  century. 

Hence  (juggenberger  wisely  remarks  ("General  His- 
tory of  the  Christian  Era,"  \ol.  II,  page  125):  "It  is  not 
just  to  compare  the  judicial  methods  of  the  Inquisition  with 
those  of  the  present  day.  They  must  be  compared  with 
contemporary  proceedings  sanctioned  by  the  public  laws  in 
vogue  at  those  times.  The  methods,  which  we  deplore  in 
the  Inquisition,  were  the  methods  of  the  age;  the  redeeming 
qualities  were  due  to  the  intluence  of  the  legislation  of  the 
Church,  who  greatly  mitigated  the  severity  of  the  civil  codes. 


Moreover,  the  punishment  by  tire  was  neither  introdu:ed  by 
the  Church,  nor  confined  to  the  tribunal  of  the  Inquisition. 
As  historical  jurisprudence  informs  us,  it  was  the  penalty 
inflicted  for  high  treason  even  on  women  in  England;  for 
poisoning  and  ^  other  crimes  in  Erance,  and  for  circulating 
counterfeit  coin  in  other  countries  of  Europe.  But  the 
process  of  being  drawn,  hanged,  disemboweled  and  quar- 
tered; the  boiling;-  to  death  of  prisoners;  the  revolting  torture 
of  the  wheel,  on  which  the  victim  was  left  to  linger  with 
broken  bones  for  hours  and  days,  were  certainly  far  worse 
than  the  stake,  and  we  owe  such  amenities  to  the  mild  code 
ot  Henry  Mil  and  Q)ueen  Elizabeth."  These  are  the  black 
and  bloodv  stains  which  a  modern  English  writer  would 
wish  to  blot  out,  if  he  could,  from  the  history  of  England. 

^1.  Fifth  Rkmakk.  When  men  reproach  the  recourse 
to  "torture  as  a  special  grievance  against  the  Inquisition,  they 
feign  to  ignore  the  fact  that  this  means  of  discovering  the 
truUi  A\'as'in  use  in  all  the  tribunals  of  Europe. 

But  we  must  here  observe  that,  according  to  the  laws  gov- 
erning the  procedure  of  the  Inquisition,  the  torture  could  be 
employed  only  once  in  each  process,  and  its  use  was  far 
milder  than  in  any  other  civil  tribunal. 

A  curious  circumstance  concerning  this  subject  is  related 
in  the  memoir  oi  M.  Poullet.  The  Councils  of  Justice  of 
Belgium  were  consulted  by  Charles  of  Lorraine,  in  1765  and 
1766  as  to  projects  of  reform  to  be  introduced  into  the  crim- 
inal law,  and  particularly  as  to  the  advisability  of  the  event- 
ual abolition  of  torture.  All  the  Councils  demanded  its  con- 
tinuance A  few  years  afterwards  these  same  Councils  were 
again  required  to 'give  their  opinion  as  to  the  employment 
of  torture,  for  the  purpose  of  eliciting  confession  from  the 
accused,  and  all  of  them  repeated  their  iirst  judgment. 

We  must  also  particularly  remark  that  the  Inquisition 
renounced  the  use  of  torture  long  before  the  other  tribunals 
of  Europe.  "It  is  certain,"  says  Llorente  himself,  "that 
for  a  long  time  the  Inquisition  no  longer  had  recourse  to  the 
torture."     Moreover,  contrary  to  the  usage  of  all  civil  tri- 


\ 


/ 


32 


The    inquisition 


bunals,  the  hiquisition  did  not  permit  the  repeated  applica- 
tion of  torture  during  the  same  trial,  and  it  required  that  a 
physician  should  be  present  to  announce  when  torture  would 
imperil  the  life  of  the  patient. 

22.  Sixth  Remark.  As  to  the  Spanish  Inquisition  in 
particular,  we  have  no  reluctance  to  acknowledge  that  abuses 
did  exist.  How  could  it  be  otherwise,  when  there,  as  else- 
where, it  was  men  wlw  were  the  judges?  However,  it  is 
important  to  make  here  a  few  special  observations. 

(a)  This  tribunal  was  an  institution  more  closely  con- 
nected with  the  State  than  with  the  Church,  and  its  members 
acted  often  not  according  to  the  instructions  of  the  Popes, 
but  according  to  the  orders  of  the  King.  As  to  the  abuses, 
which  can  be  rightfully  brought  against  it,  the  Church  was 
the  first  to  condemn  them.  The  Popes  often  protested 
against  excessive  severity,  and  they  went  so  far  as  to  grant 
to  all  persons  condemned  by  the  royal  tribunal,  the  right  to 
appeal  to  a  special  ecclesiastical  judge.  Later,  seeing  that 
the  royal  judges  did  not  respect  this  right  of  appeal,  the 
Sovereign  PontitT  granted  to  all  the  condemned  the  right  to 
appeal  \o  the  Apostolic  See.  Some  Spanish  Inquisitors 
themselves  were  even  excommunicated,  in  spite  of  the  anger 

of  the  Kings. 

The  Inquisition  had  not  been  in  operation  more  than  a 
single  year  before  Pope  Sixtus  1\'  (A.  D.  1482)  entered  his 
most  emphatic  protest  against  its  cruelty.  He  wrote  to 
Ferdinand  and  Isabella  that  "mercy  towards  the  guilty  was 
more  pleasing  to  God  than  the  severity  which  they  were 
using.''  Both  he  and  his  immediate  successors  in  the  papal 
throne  employed  their  best  efforts  to  check  and  remedy  the 
abuses  of  the' royal  tribunal,  and  they  insisted  that  the  civil 
status  and  the  property  of  every  accused  person  should  be 
restored  to  him  when  acquitted,  or  if  condemned,  that  these 
should  revert  to  his  children  and  relatives. 

In  a  word,  the  Church  exhausted  all  the  influence  it  pos- 
sessed to  induce  the  temporal  rulers,  the  kings  and  the 


The    Inquisition 


33 


judges,  to  imitate  the  mildness  and  moderation,  of  which 
she  was  herself  the  example.  From  all  this,  is  it  not  absurd 
and  unjust  to  hold  the  Papacy  and  the  Church  responsible 
for  the" excesses  committed  by  the  Spanish  Inquisitors? 

That    tribunal    therefore,    when    properly    understood, 
instead  of  being  a  monument  of  the  religious  despotism  of 
the  Roman  Pontiffs,  was,  on  the  contrary,  the  means  of 
exhibiting  to  the  world  the  traditional  clemency  and  mercy 
of  the  \  rars  of  Christ.    In  the  face  of  all  these  facts,  is  it 
not  very  unjust,  says  Archbishop  Spalding  ('Miscellanea," 
Vol    I    page  232),  ''to  charge  the  Popes,  or  the  Catnolic 
Church  with  the  abuses  of  the  Inquisition?    It  is  certain  that 
they  did  evervthing  in  their  power  to  restrain  the  excesses 
of  that  tribunal,  and  if  they  at  times  failed,  it  was  the  fault 
of  temporal  princes,  not  of  the  Church.     One  tact  would 
alone  suffice  to  show  how  utterly  unable  the  Pope,  and  even 
a  General  Council  was  to  reverse  one  of  its  decisions.    While 
the  Council  of  Trent  was  in  session,  Bartholomew  Caranza, 
Archbishop  of  Toledo,  and  Primate  of  all  Spain,  was  arrested 
by  the  Inquisition  (1557)  at  the  command  of  Philip  II  and 
kept  eight  years  in  prison  for  having  incurred  the  royal 
displeasure,  and  on  a  charge  of  heresy.     As  soon  as  the 
distinguished  prelate's  innocence  was  known,  Paul  IV  and 
the  Fathers  of  the  Council  entered  energetic  protests  against 
such  proceeding,  and  demanded  the  liberation  of  Caranza. 
But  their  eiioris  were  unavailing;  the  Inquisition  remained 
intlexible,  and  llie  imprisoned  Archbishop  was  released  only 
after  eight  year^  of  captivity.    If  this  fact  does  not  prove  that 
the  Church  had  no  control  over  the  Spanish  Inquisition,  and 
can  not,  consequently,  be  held  responsible  for  its  abuses,  we 
are  at  a  loss  to  llnd  better  evidences  of  our  contention." 

23.  (b)  it  is  proved  that  the  cruelties  attributed  to  the 
Spanish  Inquisition  have  been  exaggerated  beyond  measure, 
and  this  with  notorious  dishonesty  and  bad  faith.  Llorente 
himself,  this  historian  so  hostile  to  the  Church,  acknowledges 
that  the  prisons  of  the  Inquisition  were  dry  and  high  vaulted 


una 


1 


34 


The    Inquisition 


1"  h  e    Inquisition 


35 


/ 


7 


I 


iX 


rooms,  that  they  were  palaces  compared  to  ilie  other  prisons 
of  Europe.  No  prisoner  of  the  hiquisition,  lie  assures  us, 
was  ever  loaded  with  chains  or  iron  collars.  On  the  other 
hand,  Mr.  Bourgoing,  ambassador  to  Spain,  does  not  hesi- 
tate to  say  in  his  "Tableaux  de  i'  Espagne  moderne"  ('^Tab- 
leaux of  Modern  Spain") :  "To  render  homage  to  the  truth, 
1  must  acknowledge  that  the  Inquisition  might  be  cited  in 
our  day  as  a  model  of  equity." 

(c)  What  above  all  makes  the  less  educated  people  of 
our  day  shudder,  is  the  thought  of  the  autos-da-te.  They  are 
usually  represented  as  frightful  scenes;  around  an  immense 
fire,  lit  up  to  destroy  a  multitude  of  victims,  are  represented 
a  fanatical  crowd,  and  especially  the  implacable  judges  of 
the  Holy  Oftlce,  hastening  to  contemplate  with  ferocious 
delight  this  spertacle  worthy  of  cannibals. 

The  truth  is  that  the  auto-da-fe,  that  is  to  say,  the  act  of 
faith,  consisted,  not  in  burning  or  putting  to  death,  but  in 
proclaiming  the  acquitial  of  the  persons  recognized  as  falsely 
accused  and  in  reconciling  repentant  criminals  to  the  Church. 
For  this  tribunal,  like  the  tribunal  of  penance,  absolved  those 
who  repented.  After  this  absoltition  the  auto-da-fe  ended, 
and  the  ecclesiastical  jtidges  retired.  Obstinate  heretics  alone, 
and  those,  whose  offenses  were  partly  civil,  were  handed  over 
to  the  sectilar  arm,  to  be  dealt  with  according  to  the  gravity 

of  their  crime. 

24.    (d)  It  was  a  question  here  then  of  a  public  profession 

of  faith  pronounced  by  the  acquitted  prisi^ner  on  his  being 
set  at  liberty.  This  is  the  testimony  of  Llarente,  a  great 
enemy,  as  we  have  seen,  of  the  Inquisition.  That  writer 
speaks  of  the  gross  ignorance  of  some  that  confounded  the 
atito-da-fe  (the  act  of  faith)  of  the  acquitted  with  the  ptmish- 
ment  of  the  convicted.  Moreover,  we  must  here  remark 
that  heresy  was  a  crime,  which  came  tinder  the  jtirisdiction 
of  the  Inquisitors;  but  it  was  not  the  only  crime  of  which 
they  took  cognizance,  in  Spain  they  were  the  guardians 
not  only  of  Catholic  faith,  but  also  of  public  morals.    More 


than  a  dozen  other  offenses  were  amenable  to  that  tribunal, 
such  as  blasphemv,  sacrilege,  usury,  polygamy,  treason,  and 
above  all,  sorcery  and  magic.    The  ptmishment  was  adnnn- 
istered  by  the  sectilar  jtidges,  not  by  the  Inquisition.    Were 
the  punishments  severe?    It  was  the  laity  who  apportioned 
them      The  laitv,  imbued  as  it  was  at  that  time  with  a 
genuine  Catholic%pirit,  felt  the  gravity  of  an  offense  against 
God  and  had  some  care  for  the  honor  of  God.    They  did  not 
make  lii^ht  of  blasphemy,  sacrilege,  apostasy,  or  atheism, 
as  it  is  done  by  secular  rtilers  in  our  day,  tinder  the  absurd 
plea  of  liberty  of  conscience.    They  held  that  an  instilt  to 
the  Stipreme'Rtiler  of  all  nations  was  an  insult  to  society 
itself    and  thev  measured  the  punishment  by  what  tney 
rightly  esteemed  the  gravity  of  the  offense.     Hence,   as 
Balmes  wisely  remarks  in  his  often  qtioted  work  (p.  452, 
n    ^6)    "the  Catholic  religion  can  not  be  held  responsible 
for  any  of  the  excesses  of  the  Spanish  tribunals,  and  when 
men  speak  of  the  Inqtiisition,  they  ought  not  to  tix  their 
eyes  principally  on  that  of  Spain,  but  on  that  of  Rome  acting 
under  the  vigilant  eye  of  the  Sovereign  Pontiffs."    In  tact, 
of  the  Inquisition,  as  it  was  in  Rome,  there  are  not  wanting 
high  authorities  to  affirm  that  it  has  never  been  known  to 
pronounce  a  sentence  of  capital  ptmishment;  or,  at  least,  it 
is  unquestionable  that  stich  executions  were  extraordinarily 
rare     In  Spain  the  Inquisition  was  severe,  because,  as  we 
have  shown,  it  was  more  of  a  civil  and  political  institution, 
and  because  it  often  acted  in  opposition  to  Rome,  the  part 
of  the  world  where  humanity  has  suffered  the  least  for  the 

sake  of  religion.  r  n.    o      •  i 

^5  (e)  Often  the  number  of  the  victims  of  the  Spanisli 
Inquisition  is  stated  as  being  hundreds  of  thousands  innno- 
lated  during  a  short  space  of  time.  Now,  the  iigures  of 
Llorente  himself  give  35,000  as  the  approximate  number 
of  victims  for  the  331  years  during  which  the  Inquisition 
lasted  And  again,  in  this  number  are  included  various  cate- 
gories of  malefactors  properly  so  called,  who  were  subject 


/ 


/ 


36 


The    Inquisition 


The    Inquisition 


37 


/ 


to  this  tribunal,  for  instance  smui>glers,  magicians  or  sorcer- 
ers, perjurers,  usurers,  seducers,  and  other  criminals  guilty 
of  abominable  excesses.  Hence  it  clearly  results  that  the 
number  of  those  who  were  executed  for  willful  and  obstinate 
adherence  \r  heretical  doctrines  was  comparatively  insignifi- 
cant, as  the  greatest  portion  of  victims  was  made  up  of 
criminals,  who,  down  to  the  commencement  of  the  present 
century,  would  have  been  sentenced  to  death  on  conviction 
in  any  other  tribunal  of  Europe. 

26.  Moreover,  even  this  number  is  manifestly  exagger- 
ated. Thus,  if  we  believe  Llorente,  at  the  auto-da-fe  of 
Toledo,  of  February  12th,  May  1st  and  December  lOth, 
there  were  700,  then  900  and  750  accused  persons,  respect- 
ively. The  truth  is  that  there  was  not  one  single  victim; 
they  were  simply  repenting  criminals  brought  before  the 
tribunal,  and  none  were  put  to  death.  Here,  when  it  is  a 
question  of  comparing  the  much  decried  severity  of  the 
Spanish  Inquisition  with  the  doings  of  rulers  of  other  coun- 
tries, we  are  of  opinion  that,  on  this  point  at  least,  Protestant 
objectors  would  do  well  to  be  silent.  Certainly  it  is  not  wise 
for  them  to  provoke  a  comparison  which,  if  impartially 
examined  by  the  light  of  reliable  historical  facts,  rather 
than  by  that  of  traditional  prejudice,  will  be  found  to  redound 
to  the  credit  of  the  Inquisition,  and  the  disgrace  of  the 
secular  tribunals  of  their  countries.  English  Protestants  in 
particular  should  remember  the  records  concerning  the  use  of 
the  rack;  of  thrusting  needles  under  the  nails;  of  the  Scav- 
enger's Daughter,  a  hoop  or  circle  of  iron,  in  which  a  man's 
whole  body  was,  as  it  were,  folded  up,  and  his  hands,  feet 
and  head  bound  fast  together;  of  the  Little  Ease,  a  chamber 
in  which  a  man  could  neither  sit  nor  stand,  nor  lie  down ;  and 
of  various  other  devices  of  torture,  which  were  used  by  the 
Protestant  Legislature  of  England  against  Catholic  Priests. 
Though  it  is  true  that  in  Protestant  countries,  such  as  Ger- 
many, Switzerland  and  England,  not  to  speak  of  other  minor 
places,  there  was  not  and  there  could  not  be  either  the 


1 


(i 


-"f- 


y 


Spanish  or  the  Roman  Cathohc  hiquisition,  yet  it  is  not  true 
that  there  existed  in  these  regions  no  hiquisition  at  all. 
There  were  indeed  in  full  blast  the  Protestant  Inquisitions  of 
Henry  VUl,  Queen  Elizabeth,  of  Luther  and  Melancthon, 
Calvin  and  Zwinglius,  purposely  organized  against  unof- 
fending Catholics  and  directed  to  rob  of  their  very  lite  all 
who  were  couras^eous  enough  not  to  allow  themselves  to  be 
robbed  of  their  faitli.     To  give  some  statistics,  all  taken 
from  Protestant  authorities,  Holinshed  puts  down  the  num- 
ber of  those  who  were  butchered  during  the  reign  of  the 
orand  royal  Inquisitor,  Henry  VIII,  by  the  hand  ot  the 
public  executioner,  at  72,000;  and  of  his  worthy  daughter, 
the  female  Inquisitor,  Elizabeth,  Cobbett  does  not  hesitate 
to  inform  his  readers  that  "this  sanguinary  queen  put  to 
death  more  persons  in  one  year  than  the  Inquisition  did 
during  the  whole  of  its  duration,  331  years."    It  would  be 
easy  to  prove  that  brutal  violence  and  wholesale  slaughter 
of  innocent  Catholics  signalized  the  rise  and  growth  of  th^ 
Reformation  in  Germany,  Switzerland  and  Southern  France, 
not  to  speak  of  Holland,  Denmark  and  Norway,  where 
similar  bloody  scenes  were  enacted.    Though  we  have  no 
intention  to  retaliate,  yet  in  view  of  the  historical  documents 
we  may  adduce,  we  feel  justified  in  advising  otir  Protestant 
brethren  that,  as  our  Blessed  Lord  says  in  His  Gospel,  "they 
should  first  cast  the  beam  out  of  their  own  eye  before  clam- 
oring about  the  mote  in  the  eye  of  their  neighbor"  (Matth. 
vii  5)     .As  the  proverb  has  it,  they  that  live  in  glass  houses 
should  be  careful  not  to  throw  stones  at  their  neighbor. 
i    Then   as  we  have  seen,  the  intolerance  of  Protestants  has    ,    ^ 
I    been  everywhere  much  more  violent  against  Catholics,  than-  ,^  ^^ 
)    that  of  Catholics  against  metics.    In  fact,  it  was  by  a  moslj        - 
sanouinary    persecution    tliat    Protestant    rulers    forcibly 
snitched  the  people  from  their  allegiance  to  the  Roman  y 

Catholic  Church.    And  yet  it  is  upon  the  members  of  tins       _ 
Church  alone  that  some  writers  cast  the  blame  ot  bloody 
persecution  against  tiieir  fellow  men! 


>i 


1 


38 


The    Inquisition 


v^ 


^"y 


27.  Seventh  Remakk.  It  is  right  to  judge  a  tree  by  its 
fruits,  and  side  by  side  with  the  odium  cast  upon  the  Inquisi- 
tion, to  learn  the  happy  results  which  it  produced.  Now 
it  can  not  be  denied  that,  to  a  great  extent  at  least,  it  is  due 
to  the  Inquisition  that  several  countries  of  Europe  have  pre- 
served the  Faith  untainted  for  centuries,  and  in  particular 
that  they  have  been  saved  trom  the  pernicious  invasion  of 
intolerant  and  sani^uinary  Protestantism.  Voltaire,  that  bit- 
ter enemy  of  the  Inquisition  and  (^f  the  Catholic  Church, 
was  candid  enough  to  write:  "During  the  sixteenth  and 
seventeenth  centuries,  at  the  time  of  the  Inquisition,  the 
nation  of  Spain  did  not  witness  in  her  midst  the  bloody  revo- 
lutions, the  conspiracies  against  the  throne,  and  the  terrible 
disasters  that  desolated  the  other  royal  hotises  of  Etirope. 
No  king  was  assassinated  as  in  France,  and  no  royal  head 
was  felled  by  the  hand  of  the  executioner  as  in  England." 
The  Spanish  Inquisition,  notwithstanding  all  its  rigors  and 
excesses,  which  we  freely  admit,  and  the  cause  of  which  we 
have  already  adduced,  can  say  this  much  in  its  defense.  The 
Spanish  Government  saw  that  all  Europe  was  in  tlames  and 
all  h.ands  reeking  with  blood,  wherever  heresy  and  schism 
arose  and  the  tinity  of  faith  had  been  lost.  The  Peasants' 
War,  the  Tliirty  Years'  War,  the  excesses  of  the  Anabaptists' 
seditions  in  France;  the  cruelties  that  desolated  the  Nether- 
lands; the  wholesale  butcheries  in  England,  particularly 
under  Henry  \I11  and  Elizabeth;  the  high-handed  measures, 
exiles,  contiscations  and  murders  with  which  the  Catholic 
faith  was  exterminated,  root  and  branch,  from  the  people 
of  Sweden,  Norway  and  Denmark,  taught  the  other  Euro- 
pean Catholic  nations  lessons  not  to  be  easily  forgotten. 
The  Spanish  rulers,  seeing  this,  determined  to  spare  Spain 
these  and  similar  terrors,  by  preserving,  at  all  costs,  the 
unity  of  the  faith  among  that  intensely  Catholi:  people,  and 
by  st;nnping  out  and  excltiding  from  the  realm  even  the 
first  germ  of  the  Protestant  rebellion,  which  proselytizing 
zealots  were  trying  to  disseminate  in  the  Spanish  Peninsula. 


The    Inquisition 


39 


The  Inquisition  was  the  means  devised  for  the  purpose. 
Spain  therefore  owes  to  the  Inquisition,  notwithstanding  its 
abtises  the  preservation  of  the  Catholic  faith,  the  preserva- 
lion  of  national  and  religiotis  tinity,  and  an  unbroken  mternal 
peace  at  a  time  when,  in  consequence  of  the  Protestant  rebel- 
lion against  the  authority  of  Rome  other  pans  ot  Europe 
were  bleeding  under  the  curse  of  civil  and  religious  wars. 
How  can  we  blame  that  tribunal  for  the  death  and  torttires 
of  a  few  obstinate  heretics,  when  we  see  that  thereby  the 
whole  of  Spain  was  saved  from  interminable  civil  wars,  and 
all  the  horrors  that  characterized  the  religiotis  fanaticism  of 
the  sectarians  of  Northern  Europe? 

\  brief  reference  to  another  kind  of  Inquisition  will  not  be 
here  out  of  place.    The  penal  laws  against  Catholics  passed 
in  England  and  her  colonies,  in  Scotland,  Holland,  Sweden, 
Denmark,  Switzerland  and  Cermany,  have  never  been  col- 
le'-ted  yet-  but  such  as  have  been  brought  together  at  times 
pr^esent  a  revolting  picture,  the  study  of  which  wotild  make 
certain  people  blush  and  change  some  popular  ideas.    And 
vet  in  these  States  men  were  not  introducing  new  religious 
creeds,  assailing  existing  institutions,  or  disturbing  the  ptiblic  ^ 
nea-e     They  were  inoifending,  law  abiding  citizens,  who 
simply  asked  to  be  allowed  to  retain  the  faith  and  practices 
handed  down  to  them  by  their  forefathers^ even  trom  the 
very  introduction  of  Christianity  into  their  land. 

^S  ''Consider,"  writes  Joseph  de  Maistre,  ''the  I  hirty 
Yenrs^  War  lit  up  bv  the  inllammatory  harangues  ot  Luther; 
theunheard  of  atrodties  of  the  Anabaptists  and  the  Peasants, 
the  civil  wars  of  France,  England,  Flanders,  the  massacre  ot 
St  Bartholomew,  the  massacre  of  Merindol  and  the  Ceven- 
nes-  the  murder  of  Mary  Stuart,  Henry  111,  Henry  IV, 
Charles  I  of  the  Prince  of  Orange.  A  ship  could  tloat  in 
the\^lood  which  the  Reformers  caused  to  be  shed.  Do  not 
tell  us  that  the  Inquisition  produced  this  or  that  abuse;  tor 
this  is  not  the  question;  what  is  really  important  is  to  know 
if   during  the  three  last  centtiries,  there  has  been,  because 


40 


The    Inquisition 


of  the  hiquisition,  more  peace  and  happiness  in  Spain  than 
in  other  countries  of  Europe." 

29.  "The  Inquisition,"'  as  Father  Christie  wisely  remaiks, 
''was  the  corrective  to  what  we  should  call  Lynch  Law. 
Reflect  for  a  moment  what  migiit  have  resulted  from  the 
uncontrollable  indignation  of  the  people,  Catholic  to  the 
backbone,  if  men  were  found  to  blurt  out  blasphemies  as^ainst 
all  that  such  a  people  held  to  be  holy,  and  to  spread  doc- 
trines which  would  seduce  their  children,  the  rising  genera- 
tion, from  all  that  they  deemed  precious  for  this  life  and 
the  next.  What  could  we  expect  but  tumultuary  risings; 
terrible  effects  of  violence  and  massacres — lynch  law  with 
all  its  horrors?  The  Tribunal  of  Faith  prevented  such  con- 
sequences. At  the  outset  of  the  sixteenth  century,  the  Span- 
iards saw,  as  it  were,  the  rising  smoke,  premonitory  of  a 
conflagration  in  Europe.  They  adopted  the  Inquisition  as 
the  means  for  preserving  religious  unity  and  preventing 
religious  wars.  Hence,  during  the  three  centuries  after  the 
reorganization  of  the  Inquisition,  Spain  enjoyed  more  peace 
and  prosperity  than  any  other  country  in  Europe.  We  have 
read  with  horror  of  the  massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew's. 
What  was  this  massacre?  The  most  satisfactory  account 
would  seem  to  be  that  without  lawful  process,  under  the 
impulse  of  popular  indignation,  lynch  law  was  executed 
on  the  assailants  of  the  faith  of  Frenchmen.  The  proceeding 
was  unjustifiable,  but  it  took  place  because  France  had  no 
Tribunal  of  Faith.  Spain  itself,  before  the  Tribunal  of  Faith 
was  set  on  its  efficient  footing  by  Sixtu.s  the  Fourtn,  had  its 
St.  Bartholomew  in  the  massacre  of  the  Jews  in  1391,  in 
which  five  thousand  Jews  perished.  If  then  the  very  zeal 
of  a  people  for  that  which  counts  more  precious  than  life 
itself,  is  liable  to  carry  the  multitude  into  excesses  greatly 
to  be  deplored,  it  is  evidently  most  desirable  that  a  tribunal 
should  exist  which  should  judge  cases  without  prejudice, 
which  should  protect  the  innocent,  carry  conviction  to  the 
mistaken,  and  punish  those  only  who  really  deserved  pun- 
ishment." 


The    Inquisition 


41 


30.  "A  reproach  has  l^een  made  against  the  Inquisition," 
says  Joseph  de  Maistre,  "that  it  exercised  a  Infighting  influ- 
ence upon  the  human  mind.  Now,  the  brilliant  century  of 
Spanish  literature  was  that  of  Philip  II.  As  history  testifies, 
the  golden  age  of  Spain  had  reached  its  highest  pinnacle  of 
glory  at  the  very  epoch  of  the  Inquisition  from  the  fifteenth 
to  the  seventeenth  century.  Llorenfe,  in  the  second  volume 
of  his  work,  tells  us  that  not  less  than  1 18  learned  men  were 
cited  before  Ihe  Inquisition;  but  he  takes  good  care  not  to 
inform  the  reader  that  none  of  them  lost  even  one  hair  of 
his  head."  (See  "CiviUa  Catlolica,"  Ser.  V,  Vol.  IX,  page 
657.)  'it  is  in  vain  that  men  will  keep  repeating  that  it  is 
putting  fetters  on  genius  to  forbid  it  froni  attacking  dog- 
mas, held  by  the  whole  nation;  error  can  never  be  justified 
simply  because  of  its  repetition."  "Lettre  a  un  gentilhomme 
sur  rinquisition  Espagnole"  (Letter  to  a  gentleman  concern- 
ing the  Spanish  Inquisition). 

3L  EKiiiTH  Rkmauk.  Let  us  make  a  last  remark  that 
will  allay  the  ridiculous  terror,  which  certain  men  are  pleased 
to  excite.  If,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Church  has  an  tmdeniable 
right  to  pmiish  heretics;  if  she  did  make  tise  of  this  right 
when  it  was  proper  to  do  so,  she  is  in  nowise  obliged  to  use 
it  always;  she  mtist  even  discontintie  to  use  it,  when^  its 
exercise  would  become  impossible  or  hurtftil.  One  thing  is 
the  right  and  qtiite  another  thing  its  exercise.  The  former 
rests  on  jtistice;  the  latter  depends  on  prudence,  and  may 
vary  according  to  circumstances.  And  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
the  Chtirch  has  renounced  the  exercise  of  this  right  long  ago, 
so  that  the  Inqtiisition  is  now  nothing  more  than  an  histori:aI 
remembrance  and  a  bugbear  in  the  service  of  ignorance,  big- 
otry and  impiety.  They  who  pretend  to  tremble  at  the  recol- 
lection of  this  dread  tribunal  can  now  sleep  in  peace;  the 
Catholic  sword  is  no  longer  suspended  over  their  heads. 
Would  to  heaven  that  in  all  countries  Catholics  were  equally 
secure  against  the  attacks  of  the  secular  power  usually  little 
given  to  tolerance.    What  Is  then  the  sum  and  substance  of 


Xi 


'iMjJ'''iy''-'K/^ 


tjO' 


>. 


|V 


42 


The    I  lU]  II  i  s  i  t  i  o  n 


ythis  discussion  of  the  Inquisition;'    It  is  brietly  this:  That  as 
x/  established  or  recognized  l\v  the  Church,  and  in  as  tar  as  it 
has  been  used  in  strict  obedience  to  her  laws  and  directions, 
it  was  an  institution  holy  in  its  object,  just  in  its  measures, 
and   beneficial  in  its  results.     That  the  popular  notions, 
which  prevail  about  it  in  this  country,  and  among  English 
speaking  people  in  general,  are  based  upon  falsehood,  nur- 
tured by  prejudice,  fostered  by  credulity  and  perpetuated  by 
the  instrument  of  a  hostile,  venal  press.     Catholics  do  not 
expect  any  defense  of  their  position  from  the  pages  ot  secu- 
lar journals,  magazines,  reviews  or  other  publications,  whose 
editors  and  writers,  ostensibly  at  least,  have  not  pledged 
.    themselves  to  the  advocacy  of  any  particular  creed ;  but  we 
have  a  right  to  see  that  our  Church  and  her  institutions  are 
neither  maligned  nor  misrepresented,  for  we  hold  our  faith 
dearer  than  our  lives,  and  we  shall  not  allow^  it  to  be  atta:ked 
with  impunity.    The  Church  is  our  Mother,  and  nothing  to 
us  is  more  luminous  than  the  fact  of  her  heavenly  origin 
and  divine  institution.    And  as  she  is  to  us  a  Mother,  to  her 
we  are  as  sons.     Her  honor  is  ours;  her  dishonor  our  dis- 
honor.   He  who  ventures  to  strike  at  her  good  name  raises 
up  an  army  against  himself.    Smite,  wound,  slander,  calum- 
niate, hold  us  up  to  ridicule  personally,  and  we  can  bear  it. 
L3ut  touch  her  not ;  thrill  us  not  through  by  casting  a  scornful 
eye  on  her;  the  arrow  is  in  the  string,  and  the  bow  is  bent, 
and  ten  thousand  mighty  ones  of  Israel  guarding  the  citadel 
of  faith  are  at  her  side  ready  to  defend  her  with  voi:e  and 
pen  and,  if  need  be,  even  with  the  sacrifice  of  their  lives. 
Catholics  are  justly  sensitive  to  many  things  regarding  their 
belief;  but  there  is  one  thing  which  they  feel  more  accutely 
than  all,  the  indignities  and  calumnies  heaped  upon  their 
Church,  to  whom  they  owe,  under  God,  their  spiritual  life 
and  their  happiness,  both  here  and  hereafter. 

To  enable  our  readers  to  pursue  more  at  length  the  study 
of  this  question,  in  which  we  have  been  comparatively  brief, 
we  here  append  a  list  of  works  that  will  not  fail  to  sub- 


T he    I  n q u i s i t  i 0 n 


43 


stantiate  all  our  assertions,  and  prove  agreeable  to  those  who 
are  honest  eiKui^h  to  act  on  the  principle  ^audi  alteram 
partem"  (hear  both  sides  of  the  question  before  you  pro- 
nounce a  delinite  judgment) : 

^2.     (1)    ''Letters  on  the  Spanish  Inquisition,'*  by  De 
Maistre,     English  translation  from  the   French.     Boston, 

1850. 

(2)  Balmes'  "European  Civilization"   (work  referred  to 

above),  ch.  24,  25,  26,  and  note. 

(3)  "The  Life  of  Cardinal  Ximenes,"  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Von 
Hefele.    Translated  from  the  German.    London,  i860;  ch. 

17,  18.  ^      .  .   „ 

(4)  "An  Historical  Sket:h  of  the  Order  of  St.  Dommic, 

by  Lacordaire,  O.  P.,  New  York,  1869. 

(5)  Goschler's  "Dictionnaire,"  Vol.*  XI,  p.  430-443. 

(6)  Bergier's  "Dictionnaire,"  Vol.  II. 

-Traite  de  la  N'raie  Religion,"  Vol.  Ill,  p.  457;  Vol.  11, 

pp.  169  and  385. 

(7)  ''Points  of  History."     Boston;  reprinted  from  the 

London  edition. 

(8)  Kenrick's  "Primacy  of  the  Apostolic  See,"  p.  424-441. 

(9)  "Popular  Errors  Concerning  Politics  and  Religion," 
London,  1874,  p.  l56,  by  Lord  R.  Montagu,  M.  P.      ^ 

(10)  Broe:kaert,  S.  J.,  ''The  Fact  Divine."  Portlana,  Me., 

1885 '  ch    17. 

(11)  Gibbons'  "The  Faith  of  Our  Fathers,"  ch.  18. 

(12)  Taparelli,  S.  J.,  "Saggio  Teoretico"  (Essay  on  Natu- 
ral Right),  note  x:iii.    Rome,  1855. 

(13)  Ai^^e  de  Vayrac,  "L'  etat  present  d'Espagne."   Am- 

sterdam,  1719.  ,  „     ,-,  ... 

(14)  Balutfi,   "The   Charity  of  the   Church.       Dublin, 

1885  *  ch.  21. 

(15)  "a' Vindication  of  the  Catholic  Chnrch,"  by  Arch- 
bishop Kenrick ;  \\  243.  . 

(16)  "Snmmer  School  Essays,"  Vol.  li;  "The  Spanish 
Inquisition,"  by  Rev.  J.  F.  Nugent. 


Xa 


\ 


1 


A  A 

I  I 


The    Inquisition 


(17)  "Abridged  Course  of  Religious  Instruction,"  by 
Schouppe,  S.  J.;  p.  69. 

(18)  ''A  Brief  for  the  Spanish  Inquisition,"  by  Hliza  At- 
kins Stone. 

(IQ)  ''Mooted  Questions  of  History,"  by  Humphrey  Des- 
mond; p.  218. 

(20)  "Some  IJes  and  Errors  of  History,"  l^y  Rev.  Reuben 

Parsons;  p.  121. 

(21)  "Modern  History,"  by  Fredet;  note,  p.  5 18. 

(22)  "The  Tribunal  of  Faith— The  Inquisition,"  article  by 
Albany  Jones  Christie,  S.  J.;  Month,  Vol.  49,  p.  82. 

(23)  ''Le  Menzogne  Nella  Storia"  (Historical  Lies). 

(24)  T)istionnaire  Apologetique,"  by  J.  Jaugey;  \'ol.  I, 

p.  1525. 

(25)  "Brownson's  Works,"  Vols.  VI,  X,  XII  and  XUl. 

(26)  "Catholic  Controversy,"  a  reply  to  Dr.  Littledale's 
"Plain  Reasons,"  by  H.  S.  D.  Ryder,  of  the  Oratory;  p.  2()9. 

(27)  "CatJiolic  Dictionary,"  p.  446-448. 

(28)  "Ecclesiastical  Dictionary,"  p.  361-362. 

(29)  "Manual  of  Universal  Church  History,"  by  Dr.  J. 
Alzog;  p.  ^)79-987. 

(30)  Devos,  "The  Three  Ages  of  Progress,"  pp.  165,  170, 

235,  246. 

(31)  Guggenberger,  S.  J.,  ''A  General  History  of  the 
Christian  Era,  \  ol.  II,  p.  120-126.  The  reader  will  lind  in 
this  work  a  very  able,  though  condensed,  treatment  of  the 
whole  question. 

(32)  Ludwig  Pastor,  "The  History  of  the  Popes,"  Vol. 

1\ ,  p.  398-405. 

(55)  Cesare  Cantu,  "Storia  Universale"  (Universal  His- 
tory), Vol.  \1I,  p.  115-124. 

(34)  Rohrbacher,  "Universal  History  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  Vol  II,  p.  553-563.     Italian  edition,  1861. 

(35)  Bishop  England,  \ol.  1,  pp.  13,  183,  231,  309. 


( I 


/•    ♦ 


on 


TESTIMONIALS 

the  merits  of  "Christian  Apologetics."  in  two  volumes, 
from  which  the  preceeding  "  Essay  on  the 
Inquisition"  has  been  extracted 


LETTHR  OH  CARDINAL  SECRETARY  OE  STATE. 

Rome,  January  13,  1904. 

REV.  JOSEPH  C.  SASIA.  S.  J.: 

Reverend  Father-With  pleasure  1  hastened  to  plare  in 
the  veneral^le  hands  of  the  Holy  Father  the  work  ot  Deviv- 
iefs  "Christian  Apologetics,"  edited  by  your  Reverence  in 
the  English  language.  His  Holiness  received  the  gift  with 
feelings  of  deep  satisfa:tion,  congratulating  you  tor  having 
dedicated  your  talent  to  make  better  and  better  known,  a.nd 
to  spread  more  and  more  the  truths  and  beauties  oi  the 

Catholic  religion.  uv.u^^ 

He  expressed  the  earnest  hope  that  the  work  you  published 
may  produce  most  abundant  fruits,  particularly  among  the 
people  of  the  American  Commonwealth,  and  thus  lead  an 
ever  increasing  number  of  souls  to  the  true  tove  and  the 
true  faith  of  Jesus  Christ.  And  with  a  view  that  the  good 
wishes  of  His  Holiness  may  he  fully  realized,  and  you  niay 
have  a  pledge  of  the  special  benevolence  that  he  cherishes 
in  your  regard,  he  imparts  to  you  his  apostolic  benediction. 

As  to  myself,  whilst  thanking  your  Reverence  most  cor- 
diallv  for  the  copy  you  presented  to  me,  1  cheerlully  prolit 
by  this  occasion  to  declare  myself  with  sentiments  ot  par- 
ticular esteem, 

Yours  trulv  in  our  Lord, 

R.  CARDINAL   MERRY    DEL   \  AL. 

The  above  is  a  faithful  translation  of  the  Italian  original 


submitted  to  me. 
February  8,  1904. 


p.  W.  RIORDAN, 
Archbishop  of  San  Francisco. 


f 


It 

l\ 


■llB 


V 


1 


! 


^ 


46 


Testimonials 


Washington,  D.  C,  August  25,  l^)o3. 
REV.  J.  C.  SASIA,  S.  J.: 

Reverend  and  Dear  Father — On  my  return  to  Washing- 
ton, after  an  absence  of  some  days,  I  have  iound  your  kind 
letter  and  the  work  you  have  been  pleased  to  send  me. 
Please  accept  m\'  sincerest  thanks  for  your  kindness. 

Truly,  Reverend  Father,  you  deserve  the  gratitude  of  all 
the  Cath.)lics  who  speak  English,  for  having  so  well  repro- 
duced, augmented  and  edited  in  the  English  language  the 
work  entitled  ''Christian  Apologetics,"  by  Rev.  W.  Devivier, 
S.  J.  The  extraordinary  success  which  the  book  has  met  with 
in  France  and  everywhere,  is  a  sullicient  proof  of  its  merits 
and  usefulness.  1  hope  that  it  will  meet  with  similar  success 
in  America. 

Praying  God  to  bestow  upon  you  and  upon  your  labors 
His  choicest  blessings,  I  remain,  yours  in  Christ, 

'd.  FALCON IO,  Apostolic  Delegate. 


St.  Mary's  Cathedral,  San  Francisco,  Cal. 

It  gives  me  great  pleasure  to  add  my  name  to  those  of 
the  distinguished  Archbishops  and  Bishops  who  have  given 
their  approval  to  the  work  ''Christian  Apologetics,''  by  Rev. 
W.  Devivier,  S.  J.,  which  work  is  now  reproduced  in  our 
language,  edited,  augmented  and  adapted  to  English  readers 
by  the  Rev.  Joseph  C.  Sasia,  S.  J. 

I  recommend  it  in  a  very  special  manner  to  the  Reverend 
Clergy,  Teachers  in  our  Catholic  Institutions,  and  advanced 
pupils  in  our  Colleges  and  Academies.  It  contains  a  very 
able  and  complete  exposition  of  the  doctrines  of  our  religion, 
and  a  refutation  of  the  objections  which  are  niiuie  to  it, 
especially  those  urged  by  the  so-called  scientists. 

I  sincerely  hope  that  this  valuable  work  will  meet  \\'ith  tiie 
encouragement  it  so  richly  deserves. 

PATRICK    W.  RIORDAN, 

June  4,  1903.  Archbishop  of  San  Francisco. 


Testimonials 


47 


The  undersigned,  Superior  of  the  (^ihtorma  M^s^n  d 
the  society  of  Jesus,  in  virtue  of  fac.aties  S™  ^  f  ^^^ 
bv  the  X^ery  Reverend  Louis  Martin,  General  of  the  same 
Z£y.  hereby  permits  the  publication  of  a  book  entuW 
'christian  Apologetics,  or  A  Rational  .^^^P-^  -  o  the 
Foundations  of  Faith,"  by  Rev.  W.  Devivier,  S.  J.,  edited  l^y 
Rev  Joseph  C.  Sasia,  S.  J.,  the  same  having  been  approved 
bv  the  censors  appointed  to  i^^t.  ^   ^^^^^^^^^  ^    ^ 

St.  Ignatius  College,  San  Francisco,  Cal, 


Xi 


V 


■■iiiiifciiiii 


1 


M 


WHERE  "CHRISTIAN    APOLOGETICS"  CAN    BE 

PROCURED. 

The  followiiii;-  Catholic  publishers  keep  the  work  for 
sale,  viz: 

Galla^iiher  Bros.,  27  Grant  Ave.,  San  Francisco,  (^al. 

Fr.  Piistet  Si  Co.,  52  Barclay  St.,  New  York. 

B.  Herder,  17  South  Broadway,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

D.  J.  Sadlier  Si  Co.,  1669  Notre  Dame  St.,  Montreal, 
Canada. 

The  James  Clarke  Church  Goods  House,  627  Fourteenth 
St.,  Denver,  Col. 

W.  E.  I31ake,  602  Q)ueen  St.,  Toronto,  Canada. 

John  J.  Bodkin,  Ottice  of  *'The  Tidini^s,"  Los  Angeles, 
Cal. 

Burns  &  Oates,  28  Orchard  St.,  London  England. 

M.  H.  Gill  &  Son,  5()  O'Connell  St.,  Dublin,  Ireland. 

William  P.  Linehan,  3()9  Little  Collins  St.,  Melbourne, 
Australia. 

In  San  Jose,  Cal.,  the  book  can  be  obtained  from  the 
Catholic  Book  Store,  San  Fernando  St.,  between  Market  and 
First,  and  from  the  Jesuit  Fathers'  residence,  next  to  St. 
Joseph's  Church,  on  San  Fernando  St. 

A  liberal  discount  will  be  made  to  Seminaries,  Colleges 
and  Academies  adopting  the  work  as  a  textbook.  The  reduc- 
tion will,  of  course,  be  in  proportion  to  the  average  number 
of  copies  purchased.  The  special  terms  can  be  settled  by 
corresponding  with  the  above  mentioned  publishers,  or  with 
the  editor.  Rev.  Joseph  C.  Sasia,  S.  J.,  St.  Ignatius  (College, 
San  Francisco,  Cal. 

June  4,  1903. 


\ 


\*u,„        V 


m&^•i 


COLUMBIA   UNIVERSITY   LIBRARIES 

This  book  is  due  on  the  date  indicated  below,  or  at  the 
expiration  of  a  definite  period  after  the  date  of  borrowing,  as 
provided  by  the  library  rules  or  by  special  arrangement  with 
the  Librarian  in  charge. 


DATE  BORROWED 


OATK  DUE 


%    %% 


DATE  BORROWED 


DATE  DUC 


C28v747>M100 


A, 


^  GAYLAMOUNT 

;  PAMPHLET  WNDER 

[        Manu/aduted  bv 
J  GAYLORD  BROS.  Ir»e. 
^         Syracute,  N.  Y. 

*,  Stockton,  CsliT 


ftpR  12  y^<* 


